Skip to main content

Full text of "Handbook of the English Language: For the Use of Students of the Universities and Higher Classes ..."

See other formats


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http: //books .google .com/I 















K. G. LATHAM, M.A., M.D. 

T COU.H», umDOI! 

mifTii EDiTioy 





My first work on the structure of the English Lan- 
guage, and the allied subjects, such as its history, 
dialects, and its place in the Indo-European family, was 
published in 1841. These were questions that, in the 
main, were held to be important because they were 
introductory to others of a higher kind ; i.e. the study 
of Comparative Philology, in general. 

This, however, is an object which may be put forth 
too exclusively. Nor does it apply to the English 
Language in particular. It is the case with every other 
language in the world, provided only that it be the 
native language of the student. Every other language 
he has to learn ; and, when he has learned it, it is 
never so familiar to him as his own. If he learn it 
from books, many (perhaps most) of the rules are 
of artificial character. But, in the mother-tongue, 
the necessary materials present themselves spontane- 
ously, and the study of principles can be pursued with- 
out any secondary object to distract the thought or 
divide the process between the memory and the reflective 

A doctrine of this kind, as a reason for the ^tu^^ 


of one's mother-tongue, when pressed either too strongly 
or unseasonably, invests even such an important lan- 
guage as the English with the character of a mere dis- 
ciplinal study ; or, at least, that of a preparatory study 
in which the language itself plays but a secondary 
part. There are times, however, when reconmiendations 
of this kind are not without their use. Say what we 
may, every man in England knows a great deal about 
the English Language (perhaps more than he knows 
about anything else), and all this knowledge he has got 
without an effort. If he can read, he has had to be 
taught spelling ; and with this he may, not unnaturally, 
think that he should be satisfied. At any rate, he 
knows that he can read English with pleasure to him- 
self, and write it with average accuracy ; and that 
others can carry the use of it to the highest degree of 
exceUence, both in writing and in speaking, with little 
or no theoretical knowledge of its structure. 

The time, however, for a reason being required for 
the study of English has gone by : and with it has gone 
by the necessity of a good deal of preliminary informa- 
tion which thirty or forty years ago was, by no means, 
generally diffused. At present, illustrations of t]ie 
dialects of the Thames and Tweed may be taken from 
those of the Indus and Ganges, without any preliminary 
notice of the relations between the Sanskrit and the 
German, simply because the aflSnities of the German 
family are known. Writers of the Middle English may 
be studied in adequate Seading Books, or in well-edited 
texts whichreplace the limited supplies of the Roxburghe 
Club publications, and the similar csuvres de luxe of the 


last generation. Instead of indistinct and perfunctbry 
renderings of passages from the Old English, we parse 
and construe with as scrupulous a sense of responsibility 
as we have in Latin and Grreek — and in all this there is 
progress and improvement. 

The present work is one of three ; the smaller one 
being a more elementary, the larger a more expanded 
form of it. I find it diflScult to say whether, between 
the three, I have done most in the way of re- writing or 
most in that of retrenchment. It is certain that a great 
deal has been done in both ways. The general charac- 
ter, however, of the earlier editions has been preserved. 

THere has, of late, been progress and improve- 
ment. Yet, it is doubtful whether the progress has 
been uniform throughout. It by no means follows, 
that because one part of a field is cultivated with suc- 
cess, the other is not neglected. It is the opinion of 
the present writer that within the last ten or fifteen 
years, two tendencies have been prevalent. One is the 
somewhat overhasty promulgation of doctrines which, 
though certainly what we may call advanced, have 
either not been sufficiently verified or, else, not suffici- 
ently limited and defined in their application. The 
other is the accumulation of particular details to the 
n^lect of general principles. This is what is sure to 
happen whenever any department of investigation 
makes a sudden progress ; and that the rule in English 
Philology has been one of progress no one can doubt. 
Still less can anyone doubt that it has been rapid. With 
this promulgation of general rules, and accumulation 
of instances, the present writer thinks that the processes 


of verification and classification have not gone pari 
passu. Arrangement, however, or classification is 
the very essence of special Grammar ; and the exact 
measurement and limitation of the extent of a rule or 
law, that of Comparative Philology. 

The present work is called a * Handbook of the 
Language.' Be it so. To say nothing about what a 
student may get for himself from the direct study of 
our older writers — and this is, in reality, the only 
knowledge that he can call his own — ^it is mere trifling 
to induce him to believe that he can get anything of 
much value from one book only — albeit it may call 
itself a Handbook. There are many Handbooks — 
though imder different names — and of these no one is 
all-suflScient. There are four writers, at least, whose 
works are simply necessities to anyone who seeks an 
adequate notion of what the English language really is. 
There is something of course, in the present work which 
is found in none of them ; otherwise it would not have 
been published. • It is certain, however, that, whether 
we take the writings of Dr. Morris, Dr. Murray, Pro- 
fessor March, or Dr. Abbott, there is something to be 
found in one of them that is not to be found in the 
others; something, moreover, which no one can well 
do without. The English is in no sense whatever 
lingua uni/us libri. 

The First Part, treating as it does of the introduc- 
tion, diffusion, and Continental origin of our language, 
is purely historical. Nevertheless, there are whole 
chapters wherein the criticism is that of the gramma- 
rian rather than the historian. There are many reasons 


why this should be the case. Most languages have 
more stages, and most languages have more dialects 
than one. In its earlier form the English had as many 
inflections as the present G-erman : in its existing form 
it has fewer than the French. Again, there are in 
English three well-marked dialects ; and two of these 
may probably be traced to two distinct parts of Ger- 
many. The investigation, however, is by no means 
simple ; and, if properly pursued, requires not only the 
testimony of the historian and the geographer as to the 
time and place to which such or such a form of speech 
is to be assigned, but, also, the internal evidence that 
is supplied by the language itself. Where the exter- 
nal testimony is ample and adequate, this reference 
to the language may be neglected. But in English 
it is absolutely indispensable ; more so, perhaps, 
than in any other language : and the reason is mani- 
fest. The history of the centuries during which the 
. English from the Continent displaced the original 
British of our island is lamentably obscure. Hence, 
the comparison of certain dialects of England and 
those of Germany, with which they are considered to 
correspond, becomes necessary ; and, what is wanting 
in proper historical testimony, must be sought for in 
the domain and by the methods of the philologist. 

Of the passages relating to either the Angles, the 
Saxons, or any other German population with which the 
early history of the English Language can reasonably be 
connected, I have given all that either convey, or suggest, 
any definite information ; beginning with Tacitus and 
ending with Procopius. What they tell us explicitly is 


very little. If anything of value can be got from them, 
it must be done by inference ; and inference only. The 
inferences, however, from the Greek and Latin Writers 
for the times under notice, whether rightly or wrongly 
drawn, rest on the unexceptionable evidence of writers 
either cotemporary or nearly so, and of writers with 
ample sources of information. But with the Sixth 
Century the assurance of a firm foxmdation ends. 

The evidence of Beda I have treated in a reveren- 
tial spirit. He writes in the middle of the Eighth 
Century, upon events which took place between the 
middle of the Fifth and Sixth. With the exception of 
Gildas, Constantius, and Orosius, whose texts are as ac- 
cessible to us as they were to him, he quotes no autho- 
rities. I am willing, however, to believe that where he 
gives names, dates, and special events, he is following 
some accoimt, or belief, which had a foundation in fact. 
I neither affirm nor deny the reality of his Ceawlins, 
his Cenrics, and his Hengists. Each stands or falls by 
the special narrative of his actions. But what I em- 
phatically deny is the value of Beda's evidence on the 
negative doctrine, that there were not only intruders of 
G-erman blood, who did on British soil what they are 
said to have done, but that they were the first of their 
countrymen who did it. The bearing of this distinc- 
tion is evident. That the English language is German 
is beyond doubt ; and it may be added that (so little is 
there any British admixture in it) it is just as German 
as if we had found it in Westphalia, or as if Britain, 
when Germanized, were an uninhabited island. If 
there is any exaggeration in this, it is of small account. 


What it means is simply that, if our German, or our 
British blood, is to be measured by our language, we 
are Germans as purely and simply as any in Germany. 
There are those who believe this. There are those who 
believe just the contrary. There are those who are in 
no hurry to form an opinion on the question. But with 
all of them, one point is of great importance ; viz. the 
rate at which the intrusive German element established 
itself. The longer the time allowed for it the more 
gradual will be its operation, and the greater the 
chances of admixture of German and British blood. 
The shorter the time so allotted the greater becomes 
the necessity of some sharp and short coup de main, 
either by the extermination of the original British, or 
the driving them up into the mountains of Wales, so 
as to create a vacuum in England for the displace- 
ment, rather than the amalgamation, of the superseded 
British. The shortening, then, of the time is little 
more than another name for the rapidity and violence 
of the change. This Beda's account favours ; and 
Beda's account, no matter why, is very generally fa- 
voured by others. Now Beda makes the German in- 
trusions in Britain begin within a year or two of 
A.D. 450; while the panegyrist, Eumenius, address- 
ing the Imperial rival of Carausius, tells us of 
Franks in England so early as a.d. 297. This diflFer- 
ence between the times allowed for the English lan- 
guage to extend itself is considerable. All that the 
present writer pretends to give is the evidence. The 
report upon it he leaves to the reader. The greater 
portion of it applies to the Saxons of Gaul ; of whom, 


although we know but little, we know more than we 
do of those of Britain. It is submitted, then, that 
such being the case, we have had no better basis for our 
inference than the analogy of the Litus Saxonicum * of 

To the respective meanings of the terms Angle and 
Saxon, unusual space is devoted ; the result being that 
the difference between the Saxon of the Southern, and 
the Angle of the Northern counties of England, whe- 
ther great or little (for no opinion is given as to the 
absolute amount of it), was greater than that between 
the Saxon and the Frank. 

Little good, however, in the investigation of this 
question comes from either comparisons or contrasts 
between the Saxons and the Franks unless we recognize 
distinctions between Franks themselves; i.e. between 
those of the Upper Bhine, those of the Alemannic 
frontier (or those of Franche Compt^), and those on the 
very mouth of the Bhine, and on the frontier of the 

* There is no such name as Litus Saxonicum in Britain. The South 
and South-eastern coast of Britain was not a LituSt but a lAmes^ i.e. 
Limes Saxonicus — wholly or in part. The Litus Saxonicum was the 
coast of Gaul ; and on this Litus there was a Limes, differing from the 
Lim^s Saxonicus in being called by the Latinized German term Marea. 
In this we have evidence of a German element on the Litus Saxonicum 
sufficient to effect the adoption of a German military term. But the 
March itself was not German, i.e. not held by Marchmen of the German 
denomination. The Limes Saxonicus of Britain is, in G^ul, the Marca 
Dalmaia in Litore Saxonico. Whatever may be said in favour of the 
Limes Saxonicus meaning a district that had to be defended against 
the Saxons, rather than one occupied by them, it is certain that the 
nearest iUustration that applies to the interpretation of the term Saxon- 
icus makes against it. The Dalmaia Marca was, probably, a March on 
which the German element preponderated. It was certainly not a 
March for the purpose of repelling either buccaneers, or invaders, from 


Saxons and Ghamavi, between which the difference 
may have been considerable. To this frontier belong 
the Franks described by Julian, the Franks of the 
Salian denomination, i.e. the Franks that have the 
best claim to be considered as. the G-erman allies of 
Caransius, and the likeliest of all the Germans to have 
been described under different names according to the 
coimtry of the historian. Now we have seen that 
* Saxon ' was not a term of the Western Empire ; and 
that enemies who in Italy would be Franks^ would be 
in Constantinople Saocons. The strangeness of this 
latter denomination to the Bomans of the Western 
Empire has not, hitherto, been insisted on. In the 
present work it may possibly be pressed too strongly. 
At any rate, it makes the difference between a Salian 
Frank and a Saxon of the Lower fihine little more than 
nominal. The Frank dialects of which we have speci- 
mens (for of the Salian we have none) in nowise con- 
travene this view. On the other hand, however, the 
Westsaxon of Britain and the Old Saxon of Westphalia, 
for which we have specimens, have long been known 
to be nearly identical ; and we must remember that it 
is between Westphalia and the Grallic Litus Saxonicum 
that both the Franks and the Saxons of Julian present 

Now, whether we trace the Frank or the Saxon 
to what we may call his proper occupancy in Ger- 
many, we can never trace him beyond the Delta of 
the Bhine ; or to soil exclusively German. The Saxon, 
during the Fourth and Fifth Centuries, may be found 
on both Gallic and British waters ; and on reasonable 


grounds^ may be assumed to have settled in certain 
parts of Graul and Britain; but it is always on the 
Boman frontier, and, always, in contact with Boman 

The evidence, however, on the strength of which we 
connect their dialect with that of the German of West- 
phalia is unexceptionable. As early as the Ninth Cen- 
tury we have specimens of both the Saxon of the Saxon 
parts of England, or Wessex, and the Saxon of West- 
phalia, the typically Saxon part of Germany ; and that 
they are little more than dialects of the same language 
has long been recognized. But it is only with the 
English of the Westsaxon parts of England that this 
close similarity on the part of the Westphalian dialect 
holds good. 

The character of the Angle districts is more ob- 
scure ; and the evidence of a widely different character. 
To set against the numerous notices of the Saxons be- 
tween the first one by Julian, and the statement of 
Prosper Tiro that a.d. 441 the * Britai/na were brought 
under the government of the Saxons^ we have' not so 
much as a single instance of the use of the ^or A Angle. 
Nor have we one for the times anterior to the Saxons 
of Julian except that of Ptolemy, many years before. 
For those after the date of Prosper Tiro, we have none 
earlier than that of Procopius ; in other words, we have 
only two for nearly 300 years ; or none during the 
time when the Saxons are mentioned — ^i.e. no concur- 
rent mention of the two denominations. Nor have we 
any specimens of any German dialect of the Angle part 
of Gennany. 


Hence, the first step to be taken in the investiga- 
tion is to look to the geography of the two countries — 
England and Grermany. Our two notices of the Angles 
are consentient on this point. The Angle division of 
England is, in the main, consentient also. The Grer- 
man geography gives us the parts between Magdeburg 
and Lauenburg, the Slavonic frontier of Mecklenburg, 
or the Altmark ; and, after this, the Neck of the Cimbric 
Chersonese (Holstein). This we know, afterwards, as 
the Danish March — DenmsLrk. 

The next step is the direction of the Saxon of South- 
western Germany in the way of dialect and ethno- 
graphy. Seasons are given for believing that it ran — 
not East and West — but North and South ; and that 
the two forms of speech were divided — ^not by the valley 
of the Weser — but by the old district of the Angrivarii, 
or Angraria, which lay between the head-waters of the 
Weser and its lower course. This view stands or falls 
by its evidence. It carries, however, the line of Angle 
affinities along the Elbe, and along the Slavonic fron- 
tier, from Lauenburg and Altmark to Thuringia; a 
result which is un&vourable to the importance of the 
Frisian influences on the English language. They 
are not wholly ignored. It is held, only, that though 
in certain characters the Frisian has a special agree- 
ment with the Norse, Scandinavian, or Danish element, 
it is, on the whole, more closely allied to the Westsaxon 
than it is to the Northimibrian. 

The Angle of the Lower Elbe is thus made little 
more than the German of the Danish frontier, and is 
held to be, for the Fifth Century, not so much either 



German or Danish, or Danish or English, as a language 
out of which both English and Danish are hereafter to 
be developed — ^Danish m posse or English m posse 
if we choose to call it so* This is a doctrine which, 
from its very natiure, is incapable of being put in any 
precise or definite form. A potential language, uni- 
form, with the exception of certain mere differences of 
dialects, out of which between (say) the Fifth and 
Ninth Centuries two forms of speech as different as 
the Northumbrian and the Icelandic of the thirteenth 
century, one in England, and one in Scandinavia, could 
develop themselves, cannot but rim the risk of being 
branded as vague, hazy, and equivocal. It is possible, 
however, that the final difference may be due to certain 
characteristics developed during the interval. Beasons 
for believing this to have been the case, in, at least, 
three important instances, the Postpositive Article, the 
so-called Passive Voice, and the Pronoun of the Third 
Person, are given. But these are far from standing 
alone. That in most of the points wherein the Northern 
dialects of England differ from the Southern the former 
agree with those of Scandinavia is admitted, and in- 
sisted on : yet South of Caithness, there is not a square 
mile in Ghreat Britain where the Danish, as a separate 
substantive language, can be shown to have been spoken* 
There are signs of Danish occupancy spread over more 
than a dozen counties; and these are of two kinds. 
There are first the so-called Danicisms in the language 
of common life, and secondly, there are certain charac- 
teristic local names — especially those ending in -by — 


SpHsby, Whitby, and hundreds of others. But they 
are not regularly distributed. Between the Tees and 
the Forth, where the Danicisms are the most plentiful, 
there are few, if Any, characteristic local names ; and 
in Lincolnshire, where the local names are the most 
abundant and characteristic, the Danicisms are except 
tionally rare. Much has been written on both these 
points ; and not a little of it by myselfl But the 
^explanation makes no part of the present work. The 
doctrine, however, of what is generally called ' Danish,' 
or ' Norse influences,' and which means contact with 
intniders of later date than the Angles, is the one which 
the present writer holds to be just as liable to the 
objection of vagueness and indefinitude as that of what 
he has called the potential Danish. Of any Scandina- 
vian form of speech, as a separate, substantive, definite 
language, as foreign to the English as the oldest Ice- 
landic is to the oldest Northumbrian, he sees no sign. 
Indeed, he goes farther ; and ventures to say, that if we 
apply the same criticism to the notices of the first 
Danish settlers in Scandinavia, as we have applied to 
the similar statements of Beda as to ihe first settlements 
of the Saxons and Angles in Britain, we find no reason 
to believe that a German form of speech was spoken in 
Sleswick, Jutland, or the Danish Isles a day earlier than 
it was spoken in England and Scotland. If the reader 
choose to go fiirther, and hold that the Germanization 
of Britain and the Cimbric Peninsula were concurrent 
events, there is nothing to deter him from doing so. 

This is what is meant by the differences between 


• •• 


Norse influences, and the results of the common origii!! 
of the Northumbrian English and the Scandinavian 
languages of the present time. 

Such is the line of criticism which applies to two 
out of our three great dialects — the Saxon, the Angle, 
and Mercian — with a defined though incomplete his- 
tory, for the first two. They have a separate history 
from the very beginning ; having been different dialects 
on the Continent before they became different dialects 
of England. There is consistency combined with con- 
tinuity and synmietry in this ; giving the Shine and the 
Grallic, or Boman, frontier for the Southern German, 
and the English of the Saxon parts of England ; the Elbe 
and Slavonic frontier for the Northumbrian English, and 
the Norse of Scandinavia. I think it useless to try for 
the same correspondence for the intervening districts ; 
i.e. to find in the parts between Hamburg -and Leyden 
the same connection with the Midland, or Mercian, 
forms of speech. At any rate I have not made the 
attempt. Neither Friesland nor Holland will give us 
such correspondence of dialect as we find between 
Westphalia and Dorsetshire, nor such a name as English 
which we find in old Angle area. 

Still the triple division is a sound one. The 
characters of the Mercian are negative. Its early 
history is no history at all. The dialect may be one 
of two others with its differential characteristics obli- 
terated. It may be a mixed form of speech. It may 
be Northumbrian as far as the Orwell on one side of 
our island, and Westsaxon as far as the Kibble on the 
other. It is only as a negation that we know it. 


It is the dialect, however, of the present literary English : 
just as the Westsaxon is the literary language of the 
times before the Conquest, and the Northumbrian that 
of the Scottish of the classical period of Scotland. 
Each is the medium of its own distinct literature, and 
by that literature each is represented — ^we may, almost, 
say elevated to the dignity of a distinct language. 

The Second Part of this volume, ' Phoneais,^ is de- 
voted to the elementary soimds of our language ; their 
properties, and their relations to each other. It is, by 
no means, the longest division of the book ; but it is 
the one which, imless he be already familiar with the 
subject, should detain the reader the longest. On the 
first view the details may appear insignificant, because 
their immediate application is not very perceptible; 
and those who know when and where they will be ap- 
plied may think that it will be time enough to explain 
the nature of such or such interchanges when they 
occur. It is not, however, upon this principle that I 
liave written : but rather upon the doctrine that, where 
we have a certain amount of order, regularity, sym- 
metry, harmony and system, * the Whole is easier than 
Part;' and that it is better given in its proper place, 
and in its integrity, than left to be collected by in- 
stalments, or picked up bit by bit, from such incidental 
rules as happen to present themselves when some 
notable letter-change requires explanation. A clear 
comprehension of the respective properties of the ele- 
mentary sounds, can only be got through a knowledge 
of their mutual relations as parts of a system ; and this^ 
though it may require, at first, some time and attention, 


saves much trouble and distraction in the long run. It 
enables us, ^hen we come to special details of Deriva- 
tion and Inflection, to deal with them without inter- 
ruption, without continual suggestions of some so-called 
law of Euphony, and without the necessity of being 
cautioned against confusing the sound with the spelling 
— all these, and much more, being matters with which 
it is best to be familiar beforehand. And it may be 
added that unless we know them familiarly, they are 
scarcely worth knowing at all. Nor are they adequately 
taught by books. Still less need they be taught by a 
master. Every elementary sound corresponds with certain 
positions of the lips, cheek, soft palate, tongue, and other 
parts of the mouth as accurately as every note in Music 
corresponds with the length, thickness, or tension on a 
certain chord ; and anyone with a fair ear and a regu- 
larly formed mouth can, as he practises himself in pro- 
noimcing them one by one, with a little attention 
ascertain the exact position of the speech-forming parts 
of the mouth as each sound is produced. In some he 
can see that it is the closing and opening of the lips ; 
for others that it is the contact with the tip of the 
tongue with the teeth which is essential ; and from this 
he may anticipate such terms as Labial and Dental ; 
applied to such series as jp, 6, /, v ; t, d, th, dh, in the 
first of which the lip, and the second the tongue and 
teeth play the chief part. And what he finds in such 
groups as those he may find elsewhere. But whatever 
is to be found he can find for himself; provided only 
that he will take the trouble to do so : and he can not 
only do it without a master, but, unless he practises 


the investigation on himself, he cannot do it with one. 
It may not, indeed, be so elegant a practice to puff, 
and blow, and hiss, and buzz in fonning such sounds as 
«' or 2f*, or p\ or m' or r^ or the like, as it is to draw 
forth correct notes from a musical instrument ; but it 
is, nevertheless, a practice full of usefulness. 

The Third and Fourth Parts treat respectively of 
Etymology and Syntax ; and it may be that, in the 
eyes of some, I have exaggerated the importance of 
drawing a hard and &st line between them. It seems, 
at first, a very simple matter to say that, while 
Etymology deals with single words and the various 
forms they may take. Syntax treats of the rules by 
which two or more separate words may be combined. 
But it is only in Greek that this distinction is acted on. 
In Greek the Perfect Passive (rirvfAfiah &cO is not 
only a Tense, but a Tense which is, beyond all doubt, a 
part of Etymology. In Latin, however, the single 
word is rendered by verberatua sum. Here, the -atus 
belongs to Etymology ; and so does the -m in sum ; 
and so does each of the two words singly. But singly 
they are not equivalent to rdrvfifiai. The equivalent 
to Ttrrvfiiiai consists of two separate words, or a com- 
bination equivalent to a Tense ; and, as such, is a point 
of Syntax. In English, combinations of this kind, i.e. 
combinations in Syntax used as substitutes for single 
words in Etymology, are far more niunerous than either 
true Tenses and Persons in Verbs, or true Numbers and 
Cases in Nouns ; indeed in English the resolution of 
the inflectional forms of Etymology into corresponding 
circumlocutions of Syntax is the rule rather than the 


exception. When this is the case the language is said 
to be Analytic ; just as when inflectional forms prevail 
over combinations of different words, it is said to be 

The English may safely be said to be the most 
Analytic language in the world. But it is not the one 
in which the change from Synthetic to Analytic has 
been the greatest. This is because it was not a highly 
Synthetic language to begin with. The Latin, the 
Greek, and the Sanskrit are all languages in which 
both the Declension of Nouns and the Conjugation of 
Verbs were fer more rich in their number of distinc- 
tive signs for Gender, Niunber, Case, Voice, Mood, 
Tense, and Person, than was the oldest representative 
of the English ; viz. the Moeso-Gothic. So feu: as the 
Declension of Nouns went, the Slavonic and Lithuanic 
are not only richer than any German language was at 
any time, but richer at the present time than the 
richest of them. In respect to the Conjugation of the 
Verbs the difference is less. But the English is still 
more Analytic than any of them ; and if it is not the 
one which best shows the changes from Synthesis to 
Analysis, it is because it had, from the beginning, less of 
a Synthetic character to lose. But what it had it has 
lost to an extreme d^^ee. Of the outward and visible 
signs by which a word in Latin or Greek shows that it 
belongs to a particular Part of Speech, of the signs of 
Case, &c., to show that it is a Noun, and of Voice and 
Mood, &c., to show that it is a Verb, the English has 
but eight. And (what is more to be noted) when we 
have got them, four of them are identicaL The signs of 

PREFACE. znii 

the Third Person Singular in Verbs, of the Nominative 
Plural, and of the Possessive Singular and Plural in 
Nouns, all end in the same sound, viz. that of the letter 
*«• These are, certainly, distinctive as inflections ; but 
they are not distinctive between one inflection and 
another. Two other such signs are those of the Pre- 
terit Tense, and its corresponding Participle. But both 
are -cZ, -t, or -ed. Of the -ng in the Participle we can 
only say that, if it is a sign of the Present Participle, it 
is, also, the sign of the Verbal Abstract — as in words 
like rnornmg, &c. ; whilst the -^n in the Perfect Par- 
ticiple appears in words as imlike in sense as the Verb 
strengthen, the Adjective wooden, and the Plural form 
oxen* Hence, we have few distinctive terminations at 
all ; and those that we have are only distinctive up to a 
certain point. I make no secret of having kept this 
view of the extreme Analytic state of the English, as 
much as possible, before the reader. It is in its proper 
place when, after exhibiting the Declension of the Noun, 
and after doing the same with the Conjugation of the 
Verb, I draw attention to the small amount we have 
of either. It is, perhaps, out of place when, in the 
First Part, which is mainly ethnographical, I draw 
attention to the extent to which each of our dialects 
has either lost or retained its original Synthetic struc- 
ture. However, whether in place or out of place, I 
have drawn special attention to it ; for the difference 
between the two terms is in no language so important 
as it is in the English. 

(1 ) The English Language has been more Synthetic 
than it is now ; and the result of this is that numerous 


words which now look like isolated uninflected forms, 
are in reality fragmentary remains of a fuller inflec- 
tion. There are no better instances of this than the 
so-called Adverbs then and therej which, in form and 
origin, are simply cases of the Demonstrative Pronomi 
— ^the substantive meaning time or place being under- 
stood. But they are no longer Pronominal in sense. 
Hence the historical study of our Granmiar is mainly 
that of the change from one of these forms to the 
other; and we know that to the historical method a 
great deal of deserved importance is attached. This is 
mainly because the change itself is one of a pre- 
eminently orderly, regular, and general character — at 
least for the class of languages to which the German 
Family belongs. Throughout all the Indo-European 
languages signs of the change present themselves; 
and, in all cases, their character is the same. The 
direction is, invariably, from Synthetic to Analytic, 
and never vice versd. The inflections that are dropped 
in one language are, generally, those that are dropped 
in another. The order in which they are dropped is 
generally regular ; e.g. the sign, of the Accusative is 
lost sooner than that of the Dative, and that of the 
Dative sooner than that of the Grenitive. The character 
of the substituted circumlocutions is to a great degree 
uniform — e.g. if have, in English, is the Auxiliary Verb 
which helps us to such a combination as I have written 
=the Greek y^pa^a, habeo, in some form or other, 
plays a similar part throughout the languages of Latin 
origin. In short, the historical method, and the study 


of ibe change &om Synthesis to Analysis, are, in most 
cases, one and the same. 

(2) Another reason for the importance of the dis- 
tinction (indeed the contrast) between these two terms, 
is found in its application to pure and simple Grammar 
— Grammar in which the historical is wholly subor- 
dinated to the formal element* The arrangement of 
the so-called ' Parts of Speech ' generally presents itself 
on the threshold ; so that, as soon as we get through the 
spelling and pronunciation of a language, we come to 
the characteristics of Nouns and Pronouns, Substantives 
and Verbs, and the like. These have to be distin- 
guished from one another; and it is clear that in 
highly Synthetic languages where the Noun, with 
perhaps half-a-dozen different cases and three Genders, 
has one Declension, while the Pronoun and Adjective 
have another, it is not a very difficult matter to lay 
our own hand on each as a separate Part of Speecli. 
This is because each of them, in its inflections, carries 
with it a sign more or less characteristic; and one 
which, independent of the context, is generally sufficient 
to mark the place in Grammar of the word to which 
it belongs. 

The Greek is a highly Synthetic language, and 
with most words in Greek, even when divested of any 
context, and standing alone, we can see, by mere in- 
spection, whether they are Nouns or Verbs. In English, 
which is Analytic in the extreme, there is not one 
word in a hundred, upon which, from the evidence of its 
form only, and without reference to a context, we can 


safely pronounce an opinion as to whether it is a Sub- 
stantive, an Adjective, a Pronoun, or a Verb. 

It is manifest that with such a difference between 
them as the one under notice, a different principle of 
arrangement must be recognised; and the principle 
of the present work is that the place a word takes in 
the structure of a Proposition determines its place as 
a Part of Speech. 

It was the suggestion of the late Mr. Taylor, of the 
firm of Taylor and Walton, under whose auspices my first 
work on ' The English Language ' was published, that 
the title should be 'An English Qrammar on English 
Principles.^ It was thought, however, somewhat too 
pretentious. Be this as it may, English Principles are 
realities which English grammarians must recognise ; 
and a nomenclature and classification founded upon 
tongues like the Latin and the Greek must be aban- 
doned : though they need not be abandoned at once. 
A vast mass of detail in the history of individual words, 
a great number of useful notes both for writing and 
reading, may be got from almost any Grammar ; and, 
in many cases, without any Granmiar at all. But if 
Language, as such, is to be our study, we cannot be too 
carefiil to have our rules and our principles of arrange- 
ment as little artificial as possible. We cannot, how- 
ever, always get this so in the study of foreign lan- 
guages ; because in these there is a great deal of detail 
which must be taught as quickly and easily as possible, 
and, for this, artificial, but compendious, rules may be 
advantageous, or, at least, excusable. But, in our 
mother-tongue, all this detail lies ready to our hand. 


and has come to us as a birthriglit, and artificial com- 
pendiums are out of place. We have time to reflect; 
time to classify ; time to understand what lies before 
us. We have time to realize the fact that it is not so 
much the English Language itself that we are learning, 
as principles of Language in general; and laying a 
foundation for the not ignoble study of Comparative 





ncnoN pAGic 

1. The EnffUsh Langvuige not British . • . • . 1 

2. Languages with which it came in contact .... 1 

3. The Latin 2 

4. Relation of the English to the older Languages of Britain . 2 
6-6. Limited extent of our knowledge • # . . . 3-4 

7. Bate and Date^ fc 4 

8. The names Angle and Saxon 4 

9. The Angles of Tacitus and Ptolemy 6 

10. The Saxons of Ptolemy 6 

1. Germans of any kind in Britain — Franks . • • . 7 

12 . The Alemanni of the Younger Victor 8 

13. Saxons of the am^ of Magnentius 8 

14. The Franks 9 

15. The Saxons of the Emperor Julian . . • . 10 

16. The LUus Saxonicum 12 

17. I%e notice of Carausius by EkUropius . . • . 13 

18. Other notices 15 

1^. Saxons, Picts, and Scots ....... 16 



20. Notice of Prosper Tiro . 

21 . Notices of ^doniHS Apollinaris 

22. The Saxons of Adovacrius 

23. Confusion between Britain and Britem^ 

24. Analogy of Ganl • • . • 





25. The Angles of Frocopius 23- 



26. The Frank Mission 25 

27. The Angli of Fope Gregory 25 

28-30. Authorities ofBeda . 26-29 

31. Bedds Geography 31 

32. Value of his evidence 32 



33-34. The Old Saxon 34 

TheHeliand 34 

35. The Legend of St. Boniface 36 

The Old Saxon Abrennntiation 37 

36. The Carolinian Psalms 38 

37. Hildebrand and Hathubrand 39 

38. Tatiarie Gospel Harmony 41 

39. Otfrid 41 

40. Muspilli 42 

41. The Weissenbrun Hymn . 43 

42. High and Low German 44 




43. 2^ Frisian Dialects 45 

44. The Frisian area 45 

46. 77iG Saxonia ofPoeta Saxo 46 

46. The Frisian 48 

47. Tmusition of Letters ........ 49 

48. Declension of Substantives 50 




Bxcnoir PAOB 

49. Old Frisian 53 

50. Middle Frisian 56 

51. Modern Frisian 57 

52. North Frisian — Song for a Wcdiling 60 

The Wooer from Holstein 61 

The Wedding-stones of Eidum 62 

Rnmpelstiltaken . . . . - . . .64 

53. IHstrUmtion and Rdations of the Frisian^ fc, , . . 64 



54. Angraria 66 

55. Oittphalia 66 

56. The Slavonic frontier .68 

57. Slavonians of HoiUtdn . . .... 68 

58. Slavonians of Lauenhurg C3 

59. MeckUnhurg and Lunenhurgh 69 

60. Altmark 69 

61. The Langobards 73 

62. Thuringia and its relations to Ostphalia . . . .74 

63. The Norsavi of the Sixth Century 76 

64. The Suevi Transbadani^ 4'c 76 

65. The Anglii et Werini 77 

66. North Thuringia 77 

67. Setrospect 78 



*AM0LB' A2n> 'SAXON' as NAMB8. 

68. Value of the words Angle and Saxon as names . . 79 

69. * Saxon* as a name 81 

70. Saxons of Rudolf 83 

7 \. * Angle* as a name— Angles, Suevit and Marchmen . 84 

72. * liheine* and * Chreine* 86 

73. The Frank Embassy 89 

74. The reign of Theodebert 91 

75. English allusions to the Angles of Germany ... 93 

76. The * Traveller's Song* 94 

77. *Beoumlf* 96 

78. Retrospect 97 








79. General View of the Three English Dialects 

80. Area of the Westsaxon .... 

81. Inflections of the Westsaxon 

82. The Westsaxon — Middle Period 


The • Ayenhite of Inwit ' . 

83. Present state and Existing Dialects 

84. Fhonesis of the Westsaxon Dialects 
SO. Inflections 

86. Syntax . . 

87. Examples . 

88. Specimens 

Wiltshire . 



89-90. The Two Colonies 
91. Analysis and Synthesis 



. 99 


. 106 

. 108 

. Ill 

. 112 

. 118 

. 115 

. 117 




92. Northumbrian — ^what it means 119 

93. The Glosses 120 

94. The Rushworth Gospels 121 

95. The Durham Gospels 123 

96. The Durham RUwd 125 

97. Northumbrian and Westsaxon 126 

98. The 'Psalter' 128 

99-100. Bearings of -a and -an 130-131 

101. Break and Revival — Earliest specimen of the Northumbrian 

ofScoUand 132 

102. Northumbrian south of the Tweed 134 




103. Specimens 

Northnmberland .... 


North Biding of Yorkshire 


Westmorland .... 


. West Riding of Yorkshire 

104. Dialects of the Northumbrian of Scotland. 

105. Ilffects of contact with. the Gaelic 

106. Jnafytic Character of the Northumbrian change 


. 136-143 




*a00* AND *8BM,* 

107. The Mercian, or Midland, Dialects 146 

108. The East Mercian 148 

10^. * Hoo' and ' She' 150 

110. Preponderating Characters of the Mercian .... 155 

111. Its Analytic Character « 156 



112. Existing Dialects of the Old Saxon of Germany . . 156-160 

Parts about Essen 157 

,f Frekkenhorst 158 

,, Miinster . . . . . . . 159 

„ Ammerland 160 

„ TheJahde 160 

„ Vechta and Saterland 160 

„ Valley of the Diemel 160 

,, Minden 160 

,, Rinteln and Bielefeld 160 

„ Hildesheim 160 

„ Grubenhage 160 

113. The Saxon of Germany — how far Analytic .... 156 






li, Ind^nite character of the Mercian 164 

15. Frisian of Procopiw 165 

16. Gotha of Procopitu 165 

17. Danes of Proeopiua 166 

18. Saxony, Hesse, and 2%uringia 167 

19. Dialect of AngUn 169 

20. The Angles of the Continent—where to he sought . . 169 

21. The Norse preferred to the Frisian— why . , . .171 

22. Moesogothic and Old Norse . . . . . .172 

23. Moesogothic, Old Norse, and Old High GFerman • . .173 

24. High German Phonesis 176 

25. Distribution of Surds and Sonants 176 

26-127. Hutorg of the Mcesogothio 179 

28. Mcesogothic specimen 182 

29. Old Norse specimen 183 

30. Sigmatism of the Mcesogothic 187 

Zl. Bate of change, fc. 189 

32. The three Epochs or Breaks 189 

33-134. Nature of the connexion between Northnmbrian and the 

Norse 191 

35. Changes 193 

36. From * * ' to * « * in Mcesogothic — * Asting* and * Garding * . 193 

37. From *5* to *ii* in Old Norse— 7« and Er Prononn . '.194 

38. Is and Er Verb 194 

39. Bemains of the Nunnaiion 194 

40. Postpositive Article and (so-called) Passive Voice . . .194 

41. The Postpositive Article 194 

42-144. The (so-called) Passive Voice .... 198-201 
45-146. Afiinities between the Northumbrian and Norse . 201-202 

47. Eschewal of the yunnation, ^-c 202 

48. Rhotacismxis 202 

49. Norpe forms in -r 203 

60. The extension of -s to the Feminine Gender .... 203 

5\, The Defective Inflection of 'He* 203 

b2, ' He; ' The,* BXi^ * Se* 204 

53. The -n- in the Ordinal Numbers 205 

54. The eschewal of the form * since,* ^c 206 

55. Absence of the form in -nne 206 


ftrciioy PAGE 

156. No Participial IVefix 207 

157. Absence qf the Signs of Person in the Preterit . . . 208 
Ib^l^Q. Persons of ^ Present Indicative in -8 . . . .208 

161. ^6«ence of the GtonidYO Plural in -ntf 211 

l^2-.\^Z, Here, mther. Hence, ^ac 211-214 

164-166. Northumbnazi and Norso — Common and Proper 

Names 214-218 

167. Retrospect— Internal Evidence 218 

168. Retrospect— External Evidence 220 

169. Poda — Jomandes, &c 223 

170. The Angle district 224 

171. Ancient Denmark 224 

172. Corollary 226 



173. Stages 227 

171. Their dimensions 227 

175. Their names 228 

176-177. Objections 228-229 

178. Dialects— their bearing 229 

179. Stages in general 230 

180-182. 'Old English/ 'Anglosaxon/&c 236 

183. Place of the Hoesogothic 236 

184. l^rofessor March's Tree 238 



IS. 5. The Indo-Gernuinic, ^e. Class of LangtMges . . . 239 
186. Stfnthesis and Analysis 241 


PART 11. 




187. Spelling and Speaking 242 

Names and Sounds 243 

188. Number and Nature of the Elementary Sounds in English . 24 S 

189. Simple Sounds— The Vowels 244 

190. The Liquids 244 

191. The Semivowels 245 

192. The Sibilants 245 

193. Surd and Sonant . 24G 

194. Continuous and Explosive 246 

195. The Mutes, Labials, and Dentals 246 

196. The Palatals 247 

197. The Sound of -ng 24B 

198. Sound of h 249 

199. Compound Sounds 249 

200. The Organ of Vocalisation 249 



201. The -a in father and the -ar in farther 250 

202. The Slender and Broad Vowels 262 

203. ^ after a Liquid 263 

204. The combination of * Surd* and ' Sonant' .... 253 

205. Ko true Aapirates in English 254 


mmoTx PAOs 

206. No true DoMed CoMonanis in the same syllable . . . 254 

207. Unstable Combinations 255 

209. The Slender Vowel, &c 256 



210. Accent 258 

211-2U, Place of the Accent in English 259 

215. Distinctive Accent 259 

PART 111. 



216. Etymology and %ntax, fc 261 

217-218. Composition, Derivation, fc, 261-262 

219-220. Con^position that may he mistaken for Derivation . 263-265 

221. Hybridism 265 

222. Roots and Themes {crude forms) 266 



223. Derivatives — First Division 267 

224. The Affixes -ness and 'th 267 

225. The Affixes in -er and -ing 269 

226. Affixes in -en 2G9 

227. Change of Consonant between Noun and Verb • • . . 170 










228. Derivatives — Second Division 270 

229. Th€ Affixes -kin, -ock, ^c 270 

230. The Augmentatives 271 

231. Patronymics 272 

232. Details 272 

233. Forms in -art 274 

234. Forms in -ing 274 

236. The Affix -er in under, wiser, jj e 276 

236. The Affixes -ma and -St ....... 277 

237. Affixes -th in Ordinals . . . . . . . .278 

238. Forms in -en 279 

239. Forms in -ster 280 

240. Collective forms 280 

241. Change of Vowels, &c 281 

242. Affixes in -nd 282 

248. The affix in -ed . . 282 



244. ' Maid; and * Maiden,* &c 283 



245. Inflection 285 

246. The Personal Pronouns — The Name of the Person speaking , 286 

247. The Name of the Person spoken to 286 

248-240. True Personal Pronouns 286 

250, Artwtol Fronoutu iit AngloiMoa 287 

261. I and We; Thou and Te 283 

252. We.Our,Ui 288 

253. Wi and Mc, IV a«r/ Thou MBD 

26S-267. DualH ana Plurals 2e&-2B0 

268. Ei-clu^tt flTirf /nriimre TiJirdi 290 

230-260. -CumparatiTe Tnlle 292-204 

26\. TkaDcclntiiinisof ihcProtumn 28* 

262. Tht Dtdtation of tie Demontlrative, &c 29* 

263. Ee and Sea 297 

264. im &c 297 

265-270. They, Theu, Thou 288-304 

271. Sie,Him,&e 201 

272-273. I^ IiUtrrogatiix and B^tiBB 305 

374. Pr<,iioiiiiiiiilhanA^a:tiaUDecUiuion . . . .305. 
S76. TheSainemU 306 ( 

276. OrdinaUljf and Supaiativits/ 

277. Efcwn and T^lvt 

27S. The ■• tg' in tuaitff, be. 

270. Declension of SnbstaiitiTSB 

279. QBndec 

2»l. •nttirnuaatimia-t 

282. The -^ of the l-oiicaiif Ilural 

2Si. Tie -%iuiid of -3 as Surd or Sonant .... 

284. I'iuriil of ovrifs ending m a vowd or a dipMong 

285. The •»- in ' AoiMM ' *2' 

296. Eavei, peat, &e ^21 

2(17. Si'iMi'/Sumbtrnot enditlgia -t 323 

288. (^KTOtive and Ohtolete pneeltt* 326 

289. ThiJdjeetm >26 

290. The Comparaliee Dtgrte 326 

281. Thf t;uptrlalivc D"jm 326 

282. Com/iarisi^'i of Adverhs 327 

293. The Ma!i>-jol!M Dtgrecsin-e-na-s 328 

294. Dtfiet and Complemtnt 328 

296. Belnapeet, Amount of Deelemum 320 



296-297. Verbt qf Ilea kind*, tu. . 

398. Belaiiant ^ IndetermtnaU Verb to Noun 



299. The Verbals 337 

ZOO, The old Declension of the Verb 337 

SOI. * Indeterminate' and * Finite' as Names .... 338 

302. The form in -ififf and the Present Participle .... 339 




303-305. The Finite Verb and the Personal Pronoun . . 339-342 

.306-308. Gametf 8 Theory 342-345 

309-310. The Finite Verb essentially Personal . . . 345-346 



311. Mood and its signs . 347 

312. Signs of Number 347 

313-317. The Persons, &c 348-351 



ZIS'Z19, The Tenses— how many in English? . . . 352-353 
320-323. The Mxsogothic Reduplication .... 353-356 
324-325. * Weak* and * Strong*— the dirision natural . 356-359 
326-329. Arrangement of Perfect forms in the present English 359-363 

330. Reduplication retained— Ditj^ 363 

331. Hight 363 

332-333. Did— Hight— Held 363-364 

334-337. 7U Preterit 365-368 

338-339. The Participles in -ing and -ed 368 

340-341. The Perfect Participle 368-370 





342. Perfects with the power of Presents ..... S70 

343. ShaU 371 

344. Om 371 

345. 3iay 371 

346. Ouffht 371 

ZA7. 2>are, Must, find Wot 871 

348. The non-radical s 372 

349. Questions concerning the Perfect and Preterit . . . 373 

350. Origin of the 'din loeed, &e 873 

351. Incidence of the change when the teduplication is lost • . 374 
352-356. The -h in hight {hiht) and ^/(2 . . . . 375-379 
357-358. Contraction, and Transposition (Metithesis) . . 370-382 
859-^60. Natore of the question 382-885 

361. Amount of the Reduplication 385 

362. The -d in did, &e 386 

363. Quoth 386 

364. 'Am'^'Be*^* Was* 387 

365. Did and Became 388 

366. Mind and Minded ^89 

367. Exceptions and Irregularities 390 

368. Betrospect 391 






369-372. Syntax 393 

373. Names 394 

374.375. Individual and Comnioa Names . . . 394-397 

376-377. Substance and Attribute. — ^Abstract and Concrete 397-400 

378. Variable and Invariable^ Relational and Koiional Narnes . 400 

379. Nouns, — * NAMES * and * nouxs * 402 

380. Adjectives as Names 402-404 

381. Pronouns as Names, &c 404 

382. Many-worded Names 405 

383. Propositions 405 

384. The Copula . . 407 

385. Subjects and Predicates 408 

386-387. Declarations f ComniandSf Questions^ &c . . 409-410 

388. Parts of Speech 410 

389. Details 412 



890. The Concords 413 

301. Apposition 414 

302. Concord of the Subject and Prediciite . • . .415 

393. Government 416 

394. Collocation 417 

395. Disturbing Influences 418 

396. EUipsis 418 

397. Pleonasm 419 

S9S, Personification 419 

399. Violations, &c.» of the Concord of Numbers . . . ,419 

400. Attraction 420 

CONTENTS. xliii 




401. Arrangement 422 

402. Syntax qf the Pronoun 422 

403. Pleonasm 423 

404. */* and *Me * as Predicates 423 

405. * My ' and * Mine,* * Thy * and • Thine * .... 424 

A06. * You* and* Ye* 425 

407. * Thou* and 'You* 425 

AOS. * His* and 'Her* 425 

409-410. The Reflectiye Construction 426 

ill, 'This* and* That* 42ft 

412 J%e Indeterminate Pronoun, ' One says* .... 427 
AlZ, * It,* and ' Therfi* 423 

414. 'It rains,* fc 429 

415. '/if' after an Intransi tire Verb . . « . . .430 

416. 'I fear me* 431 

417. On the absence of the true ReflectiTe in English . . . 431 
418-419. S^mbiz of the SubstantiTe 432 

420. Ellipsis and Pleonasm 432 

421. Syntax of the Adjoctivo 433 

422. Degrees of Comparison 433 

423. Oovemment 435 

424. Pleonasm 435 

425. Bemarks on the Syntax of Adjectives 435 

426-428. The Article 436-437 

429-430. Subarticular constructions 437-430 

43l'4Z3, *AHorseofJackson*s* 439-441 

434. The Case Absolute 442 


-«.V AND 'D, — IN 'JNO, 

435. Syntax of the Verb 444 

436. QoTcmment of Verbs 444 

437. Government of a Verb by a Verb 447 

438. 'I am to speak' 448 

439. Cmaordo/lie Verb 4U 

440. Time and Time 44S 

441. Tlu Enpiatie Fretat 451 

412. TheFntDM 493 

443. The HiEtoric Present 462 

444. The Preunt Tense ConsDetodln&l 463 

445. ImpersonaJ Verbs 451 

416-44S. Anziliuy Tecbs 468-455 

4*9. Fartieipta 455 

450. The Fast ParlJdple preceded by' 2£im' .... 455 

451. The Post Participle preceded b; 'An' 457 

452-453. The Puticiple in • -iirj' 458-463 

i5i. ' Coiuiderinff all iiiagt' 4t3 

4j5. The Adrnb u a Part of Speech 

456. The D^ireeB of Comparieon, &c. . 

457. Adoerht apparenUy CaUgOTtmatie 

458. Migratum 


459. The FnpoBitioD m a Part of Speech 
4G0. Its place and unino .... 
4fll-4S2. JtsOovoramont, 

463. Tomi,humau,fic 

484. mjrcliv'., fl5 the nuue of & Cm* . 

465. Prapoeitions in AS 

466. Piepoaitiona and iDflectJoae 


467. Complex Proposi lions 473 

468. CoqjnnctioDB 47J 

4G9. ConnectioD of Propoaitioiu 47fi 

470-473. Q>pidativa and Dit/mneliiiea 47C 



474. Cansal, Illative, &c. CoxjunctioDS 477 

475. Government of the Conditional Cor^uncHone . . 477 

A1^. * Than,' KmSi* But* 479 

^^^. The Concord of Persons 480 

478. Concord of Tenses 481 



Al^. The Concords of the Relative and Antecedent . . .482 
480-481. Order of clauses 482 

482. Ellipsis 482 

483. Attraction 483 

484. Attraction and Mipses 483 

486-486. It is I^-c'est mot 484-486 

487. It is /, your master, who, ^c, , . ^ . . . 487 
A^%, Solomon, the Son of David, who, ^c 488 




489. Questions— Direct op Oblique 488-489 

400. YesbjANo 489 

491. Questions — Categorical or Indefinite .... 489 

402. Transposition of terms 489 

493. Questions of Appeal 490 

494-495. Place of the Negative 490-491 

496. The Reciprocal Construction .492 



497. Two words as one 493 

498. inference of meaning 498 

499. Order of Elements A96 

.')00. Third Element in Compounds 496 

;')01. Compound Radicals 496 

r>0-2-/>04. ClassificaUon 406-499 

606. Substantival Participles 499 







§ 1. The English Language not British. — The Eng- 
lish language was not the native language of Britain. 
It was of foreign origin ; the country to which it was in- 
digenous being Germany. After its first introduction it 
spread itself westward, displacing the original forms of 
speech. From these it differed as the language of a 
different family; for the British, like the Gaelic of 
Scotland, Ireland, and the Isle of Man, was a Keltic 
language. At what rate the intrusive German extended 
itself is uncertain. Semains, however, of the original 
languages are still found in Wales, North Britain, and 
Ireland ; and, as late as the last century, were found in 

§ 2. Lcmguagea with which it came vn contact. — 
It was the British branch of the Keltic £Eunily with 
^^ B 


-r • 


which this intrusive German first came into contact; 
for it is reasonably believed that the Graelic of Scotland 
extended no further southward than the Forth ; so that 
the Lothians and the Border Counties of North Britain 
were British rather than Gaelic. That the Picts may 
have spoken a language different from both is the 
opinion of several investigators ; but there is little that 
casx safely be said about the Picts. 

Upon the whole we may conclude that, in the first 
instance at least, it was with only one of the native lan- 
guages that the intrusive German came in contact, and 
that that language was the British ; represented, at pre- 
sent, by the Welsh. 

§ 3. TJie Latin, — Nevertheless, there was a second 
language in the island — a second language, though 
not a native one. This was the Latin of the Somans, 
for Britain was a Roman province ; and in the provinces 
of Spain, Gaul, and Dacia, the Latin language displaced 
that of the natives, leaving the several languages of 
their descendants aa decidedly Latin in their general 
character as the English is German. It has not^ how- 
ever, done so in other parts of the Empire, viz. Austria, 
Servia, and parts of Turkey, or the Provinces of Ehaetia, 
Vindelicia, Pannonia, the Moesias, and Thrace. Hence, 
one of the two series must be exceptional. Which, 
however, gives us the exception, and which the rule ? 

Reasons will be given sb we proceed which show 
that there was some Latin in Britain; but they, also, 
suggest that it was not a true vernacular like the 
British, but a learned, or ecclesiastical, language. Still 
there was a second language of some kind, and that 
language was the Latin. More than this, in respect 
to the languages with which the German came in con- 
tact, we are unable to say. 

§ 4. Melationa of the English to older languages of 


BrUai/n. — What did the new language get, or take up, 
from the older ones ? This is simply a matter of more 
or less ; and, from this point of view, we may safely say, 
at the very least, thus much, viz.: that it was not 
enough, nor anything like enough, to impair or ob- 
scure the genuine and original German character of the 

We know this; and it is not from any external 
evidence that it is known. The three great philological 
groups of the Keltic, Latin, and German languages are 
as well understood at the present moment as ever they 
were (indeed better) ; and we know that the English 
language belongs to the German family. 

We know, therefore, from the mere inspection of a 
map the direction in which the German extended ijbself ; 
and we know from the philological characters of the 
three groups to which of them it belonged. What it 
took up from the other two is, and can be, only known 
with certainty from what we find in it ; and the amount of 
this, real or supposed, practically depends on the finder. 
Some find more than others ; but no one of any autho- 
rity makes the English language other than German. 
A mioced language it may be made ; for it is, perhaps, 
impossible to find any language wholly unmixed. But 
mixture may be of any degree. No one, however, has 
discovered so much of any second element in English as 
to make it an ambiguous, an equivocal, or a transitional 
language ; or, indeed, anything like it. 

§ 5. For anything like certainty, for anything that 
can ser\'e as a basis of either philological or ethnological 
criticism, this is all we have in the way of knowledge; viz. 
(1) the foreign origin of our language; (2) its German 
character; (3) its contact with one true native ver- 
nacular, viz. the British ; (4) its contact with a aeeowd 
language — the Latin — which was certainly not XiaAiN^^ 

B 2 


and, almost certainly, not vernacular ; (5) the direction 
in which it spread ; (6) its present distribution over the 
British Isles, and, indeed, the world at large ; and (7) 
its present long recognized name — English. 

§ 6. What we know imperfectly, or only profess to 
know by inconclusive inference, is (1) the rate at which 
it spread ; (2) the date of its introduction ; and (3) the 
names and blood of the men who introduced it. This 
requires a special investigation ; and, though the first 
question as to the allied facts of rate and date will be 
short, the second will be of unexpected length. 

§ 7. Rate and date. — The rate of extension mani- 
festly depends upon the date of introduction. But, for 
this, the margin is a wide one. The earliest ostensible 
date, or that of the presence of Geimans of any kind 
on British ground, is a.d. 290 — the latest a.d. 600 — 
each there or thereabouts. 

§ 8. The Thames 'AngU^ and 'Saxon.^ — ^The names 
of the particular divisions of the Gem^tn family that 
can be assigned to English ground, are numerous ; and 
all except two will be noticed as they present them- 

These are the two which stand forward with 
such familiar and conspicuous prominence, that they 
may be said to represent the whole German intrusion, 
invasion, migration, or whatever we call it. We find 
them, even without looking for them, at the present 
time, and we find them in Tacitus and Ptolemy in the 
first and second centuries. The name of the Saaxyria 
we preserve in that of the counties of Es^eaj, Middle«eaj, 
and Sus^ecc ; and that of the Angles in every quarter of 
the world. What, however, was the import of these 
names in the fifth century ? Each of them has a special 
history of its own; but on the important matter of 
chronology they agree. Each will have a history that 


'fiEills into three dififerent stages ; and each of these 
stages will begin and end about the same time. Yet 
the details in the way of geographical and historical 
importance will be dififerent. 

a. In the first period both names are mentioned; 
but neither of them is connected, or shows any likelihood 
of ever being connected, with either Gaul or Britain. 

b. In the second the Saxons alone are mentioned : 
and that in connection with either Gaul or Britain 
exclusively. These are never assigned to the district to 
which they are assigned in the first period. 

c. In the third both the Saxons and the Angles are 
mentioned ; and with this begins the history of the 
Anglo-Saxons in England, and that of the Saxons in 

It is clear that, of these three periods, the only one 
that can bear directly upon the present subject, or the 
introduction of the English language into Britain, is 
the second. The first, however, leads us towards it; 
and, so doing, is a necessary preliminary. 

§ 9. The Angles of Tacitus and Ptolemy. — Tacitus 
mentions the Angles ; and, as he does not mention the 
Saxons, the notice of the Angles takes precedence. 

Tacitus, though lie includes the Suevi in his ' Ger- 
mania,' makes them a separate and peculiar division of 
it ; and his Angli belong to the Suevic class or section. 
They, along with others, immediately follow the Lango- 
bardi, to whom he assigns no special locality, but writes 
that, though they were few in numbers, their nobility 
was to be valued by their bravery, their independence, 
and fighting power. The order, however, in which they 
come in his narrative makes them either on or near 
the Angle frontier, and on the western side of it. The 
parts between the Hartz and the Elbe are generally 
considered to have been the Langobard occupancy. 


This brings the Langobards to the parts about the 
junction of the Saale with the Elbe. The Reudigni 
and Aviones succeed the Langobards, evidently on the 


Then come the Reudigni, and the Aviones, and the Angli, and the 
Varini, and the Eudoses, and the Snardones, and the Niuthones, pro- 
tected by either rivers or forests. There is nothing remarkable here 
except their common worship of Herth, the Mother. 

Eeudigni deinde, et Aviones, et Anglic et Varini, et Eudoscs, et 
Suardones, et Niuthones, fluminibus aut sylvis muniuntur ; nee quid- 
qnam notabile in singulis, nisi in commune Herthum, id est Terram 
Matrem colunt, &c — Germaniaj § xl. 

Ptolemy, too, mentions the Angles, placing them, as 
Tacitus does, east and north of the Langobards ; on 
the Middle Elbe ; and, besides this, specially calling 
them Sueviy as he also calls the Langobards and the 
Suevi, with whom they are connected, implicitly, though 
not totidem verbis by Tacitus. 


Of the nations of the interior, the greatest are those of the Suevi 
Angli (who lie east of the Langobardi, stretching northwards to the 
middle course of the river Elbe), and of the Suevi Semnones, who reach 
from the aforesaid part of the Elbe, eastward to the river Suebus, and 
that of the Buguntse in continuation as far as the Vistula. — Lib, ii. 
c. xi. 

§ 10. The Saxons of Ptolemy. — Tacitus mentions 
the Angles, but not the Saxons. Ptolemy mentions 
both. He places the latter on the Cimbric Chersonese, 
or in Lauenburg. This is so nearly the locality that 
Tacitus assigns to the Cimbri that, although we can- 
not say that he describes the Saxons under the name 
Cimbri, we may say that he places them in the district 
which Ptolemy assigns to the Saxons. 

The Frisians occupy the sea-coast beyond the Busacteri as far as 
the river Ems. After these the Lesser Chauci, as far as the river 
Weser ; then the Greater Chauci, as far as the Elb« ; then in order on 


thb Neck of the Oimbrio Chanonese, the Saxons ; then the Sabalingii, 
&c ; and, after the Saxons from the riyer ChaluBue to the Suebos, the 

In another part of the work there is a notice of 
* Three Islands of the Saxons,^ but without comment 
or explanation. 

Ptolemy's is the only notice of the Saxons for the 
first period in the history of the name. The interval 
between this and the first of the next series is probably 
220 years, but certainly not less than 150 ; so that the 
division is manifestly natural. 

§ 11. Germans of any kind im, Britavn. The 
FranJcs of Eum&aviis. — In reference, however, to the 
introduction into Britain of a language fi:om which 
the present English may be derived, the mere names 
are of less importance than the nations or communities 
which they denote ; and the earliest notice of Germans 
of any sort on the soil of Britain is one that it most 
behoves us to investigate. This is to the eflFect that a 
body of Franks was defeated by the Emperor Con- 
stantius a.d, 290. 

By so thorough a consent of the immortal Gods, unconqnered 
Caesar, has the extermination of all the enemies whom yon attacked, 
and of the Franks more especially, been decreed, that even those of 
yonr soldiers who, having missed their way on a foggy sea, jeached the 
town of London, destroyed promiscnonsly and throughout the city the 
whole remnant of that mercenary multitude of barbarians which, after 
escaping the battle, sacking the town and attempting flight, was still 
left — a deed whereby your provincials were not only saved, but de- 
lighted by the sight of the slaughter. 

This extract gives a Frank army in the parts about 
London a.d. 290 ; and its value upon this point is un- 
impeachable. The e\-idence is that of a panegjnrist, 
and, as such, cotemporary with the events alluded to. 
Moreover, it is addressed to hearers who had taken 
pcurt in them. Whether the victory was as glorious as 


the orator makes it, or whether the arch-pirate Carausius, 
on whose side the Franks were manifestly engaged, was 
much injured by it, are matters of minor importance. 

§ 12. The Alemanni of the Younger Victor^ a.d. 
306. — ^When Constantius with his son Constantino (<,he 
Great) passed over from Gaul to Britain he was attended, 
not only by the Boman legions which sided with him 
against his rival Galerius, but by a body of Alemanni, 
under their king Eroc(?). 

Cunctis qui aderant annitentibns, sed prsecipue Groco (alii Eroco) 
Alemannomm Kege anxilii gratiA Constantium oomitat» imperium 
cepit — Victor Junior^ c. 41. 

This is perhaps the first instance of a barbarian king who assisted 
the Koman arms with an independent body of his own subjects. The 
practice grew familiar, and, at last, became fatal. — Gibbon, Decline and 
FaUf &c., chap, xriii.. Note, 

The Alemanni, though not so decidedly a German 
population as the Franks, were, still, more German than 
aught else. We have traced them into Britain, but we 
never' trace them out of it. On the other hand, their 
dialect, even so far as it was German, would not be the 
dialect of the literary English in its West Saxon form. 

§ 13. The Saccons of the army of MdgnentivSj a.d. 
348 — 351. — The great battle of Mursa, which decided 
the contest for the empire between Constantius and 
Magnentius, is now about to be fought. Gibbon writes 
as follows concerning the mixed army of the pre- 
tender : — 

The approaching contest with Magnentius was of a more serious 
and bloody kind. The tyrant advanced by rapid marches to encounter 
Constantius at the head of a numerous army, composed of Gauls and 
Spaniards, of Franks and Saxons ; of those provincials who supplied 
the strength of the legions, and of those barbarians who were dreaded 
as the most formidable enemies of the Kepublic. — Decline and Fall, 
&c., chap, xviii. 

That there were barbarians of the same race and 


character as the Saxons in this heterogeneous army is 
certain ; nor is it improbable that the name Saccon may 
have been borne by, or applied to, them — indeed, it is 
very likely. ' Still the evidence of Zosimus, who is our 
authority, is not that of a cotemporary ; but on the 
contrary one who, from his familiarity with the use of 
the name in his own times (the fifth century), was likely 
to antedate it. 

§ 14. The Franks. — But these Saxons, whatever 
may have been their name, are associated with the 
Franks ; and the association, for at least the next fifty 
years, will be so close as almost to form a part of the 
history of the word Saxon itself. This invests the earlier 
Frank movements with importance. 

Though the name appears earlier than that of the 
Saocons, it is not quite so old as that of the Alemanni, 
the second quarter of the third century being the date 
assigned to its first appearance. Hence, the only 
Franks that have hitherto been mentioned are those of 
Eumenius, who are not the first of the name who 
show themselves in history ; and, as here, it is only on 
the soil of Britain that we find them, it is clear that 
we have yet to trace them to their own proper country. 
This, though easily ascertained in a general way, is 
by no means very definite in its details. There 
were Franks on the Lower Rhine, or in Brabant and 
Flanders ; and there were Franks on the Middle Rhine, 
for the parts about Cologne ; and there were Franks 
on the Upper Rhine, on the parts about Maynz. 
The first of these represent the Franks who, under 
Clovis, conquered Graid ; the third, the Franks of the 
present district of Franconia. If any community is to 
be either associated or identified with the Franks, it is 
necessary to ask to which division of the name it is to 
be referred. 


Now, the Franks of Carausius were the Franks of 
the Lower Ehine ; the Franks of the country of the 
Toxandri (Brabant) more especially. There were some 
on the north bank of the river, and some on the islands. 
They had been troublesome to the Empire during the 
reign of Grallienus ; they had overrun Spain ; they had 
crossed over into Africa, and they had been chastised 
by the Emperor Probus before we hear of them &om 
Mamertinus. The notices of them, all by cotemporary 
writers, fix them in a region of swamp and marsh, 
more specially in Batavia and the parts south of the 
Ehine (i.e. within the boundaries of the Empire). They 
fell into diverse nations {diversce gentes). They were 
specially coerced by Constantius ; some of them settled 
as colonists within the Empire, and some disarmed, and 
some civilized, more or less. 

Quae mundi pars est qnem ille Tincendo non dedicerit? Testes 
sunt Marmaridffi in Africa solo victi ; testes Franci intnia strati paiu- 
dibus. — Vopiscust Vit. Prob. 12. 

These paludea will appear in the sequel. 

Multa ilia Francorum millia qui, qui Bataviam aliasque cis Rhennm 
terras interfecit, depulit, cepit, abduxit. — Pacatus, chap. 4. 

Bum sedificandis classibus Bononies recuperatio comparatur terrain 
Bataviam sub ipso quondam alumno suo {Carausio) a diversis Fran- 
conim gentibus occupatam omni boste purgavit, nee oontentos vixisse 
ipsas in Komanas abstulit nationes, ut non solum arma, sed non solo 
etiam feritatem, deponerent. — Ibid, chap. 6. 

§ 15. Tlve Saxons of the Emperor Julian. — ^The 
earliest definite cotemporary notice of the name Scucon 
in connection with Gaul is that of the Emperor Julian, 
who not only speaks from personal knowledge, but tells 
us that he does so. — a.d. 358. He is on the Shine; 
in the parts where three diflFerent denominations of 
Germans meet, viz.: (1) the Franks, (2) the Chamavi, 
and (3) the Saxons. The Franks are those of the 


Salian diviBion. Brabant seems to be more especially 
the Frank ; Overijsel, the Ghamavian ; and parts of 
2^eeland and Flanders, the Saxon occupancy. Thus near 
does he bring them to Britain. 

On the testimony of a cotemporary speaking to the 
name and place of a community called Saxon^ the notice 
of Julian is, for the purposes of our present enquiry, 
the first in existence. It is the second if we count 
that of Ptolemy ; but Ptolemy's is divided from it by 
an interval of more than a hundred and fifty years, is 
applied to a population as far from the Saxons of Julian 
as Hamburg is from Leyden, and is written on the 
principle of constructive geography from book-work, 
rather than on the special details of personal knowledge. 
But Julian's notice connects them with GauL Still we 
are not doing too much when we consider that with 
Julian begins the history of the Saxons in connection 
with Britain; at any rate, we are justified, when we 
find Saxons in Britain, in assigning to them Gaul, which 
is nearest to, rather than to the Cimbric Chersonese, 
which is the fEurthest point from, Britain. Of course by 
referring them to Germany, or the area between the 
two, we can reconcile the two localities ; but, upon this 
point, it is better to say at once, that for any part of 
Germany between the Maas and the Elbe, the name 
Saxon will not be found until it has been established 
in Gaul and Britain for at least two centuries. Witli 
this preliminary we shall have no difficulty in seeing 
how far the history of the name of the Saxons con- 
nected with Britain not only begins with Julian, but is 
regularly continued from his time until we find them 
on British ground. It is continued with such regularity 
that until it ends in Britain no name of any of the so- 
called Barbarians will be more conspicuous. The Saxons 
will be as formidable and ever-present by sea as the 


Franks have hitherto been by land. They will, as a rule, 
be associated with the Franks ; but it will be with the 
Franks of the Lower Ehine. They will never, so far as 
they are traced to the land at all, be assignable to any 
district further from either Gaul or Britain than the 
parts between Leyden and Antwerp, or, roughly speak- 
ing, to the Dutch Province of Zeeland. They will, so far 
as Britain is concerned, be this and more for about sixty 
years; when their history as that of Germans who can first 
be definitely traced to Britain will have come to an end. 
The whole period of their history is no longer than this. 
No other Saxons but those of Gaul have any ostensible 
history during the time in question. The Saxons of 
Ptolemy, whom he assigns, about a.d. 139, to the 
Cimbric Chersonese, have never been heard of since. 
The Saxons of Beda, who assigns them to Germany, will 
not appear till the eighth century. 

§ 16. The Littua Saxonicum. — This important 
notice from the Notitia Dignitatum Utriusque Imperii 
runs thus : — 



Prsepositus Numeri Fortensium, Othonae. 

Prsepositus Militum Tungricanorum, Dubris. 

Prsepositus Numeri Turnacensium, Lemanis. 

Prsepositus Equitum Dalmatarum, Branodunensis, Branoduno. 

Prsepositus Equitum Stablesianorum GarionnoDensis, Gariaimono. 

Tribunus Cobortis Primse Vetasiorum, Kegulbio. 

Prsepositus Legionis II. Aug. Rutupis. 

Prsepositus Numeri Abulcorum, Anderidse. 

Prsepositus Numeri Exploratorum, Portu Adumi. (Cap. Ixxi.) 

The Captain of the Company of the Turnacenses, at Lympne. 
The Brandon Captain of the Dalmatian Cavalry, at Brandon. 
The Burgh Castle Captain of the Stablesian Cavalry, at Burgh Castle. 
The Tribune of the First Cohort of the Vetasians, at Beculvers. 
The Captain of the Second Augustan Legion, at Richborough. 
The Captain of the Company of the Abulci, at Anderida. 
The Captain of the Company of Pioneers, at Port Adur. 


The coast under his administration seems to have 
lain between the Wash and the Solent. 

There was a similar and corresponding Littua in 
G-ard, in which we find the Grerman word March 
( = Li/niea). 

Sub diapontwfu viri speciabUis Duds Beigioa Secunda 
Eguiies Dalmata Marcis in Littore Saxcnico. — 0. zxxvii. 1. 

This must be taken with — 

§ 17. The Notice of Carauaiua by Eutropius. — 
This is not the evidence of a cotemporary ; but it looks 
as if it were. 

Carautiiis apud Bononiam per tractum Belgicse et Armoiicse pa- 
candam mare accepit, quod Franci et Saxones infefitabant. — Eutropius, 
ix. 15. 

It is well known that a very important use has been 
made of this passage. With few, if any, exceptions, 
the histories of England, when they treat of the 
German Conquest, give very little prominence to the 
Littua Saxonicum ; and, when they notice it at all, 
they generally add that Sacconicum need not be sup- 
posed to mean ^inhabited by Saxons,'' but simply 
* harassed, or threatened by the Saxons,^ or ' exposed 
to the ravages of the Saxons.^ That this meaning is, 
to some degree, a forced one, few deny ; but it is pro- 
bably admitted, on all sides, that, from one point of 
view, it is not unnecessary. The authority of Beda, 
supported by that of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, makes 
the history of the German Conquest begin with Hen- 
gist and Horsa, Vortigem and Vortimer, and their co- 
temporaries ; and it is clear that if this be the case, the 
Littua Saaonicum must be explained away. This, to 
say the least, excuses a construction which, under other 
circumstances, might be condemned as non-natural. 

This passage of Eutropius does more. It makes it 


almost natural. It suggests that the Littua Saxoni- 
cum may date from the time of Carausius, and that it 
was because the Franks and Saxons had to be kept away 
from itj rather than because they occupied it, that it 
took its name. 

But it is the value of Eutropius as an authority for 
the word Saaxm, rather than the application of his evi- 
dence, that is now imder notice ; and it is the opinion 
of the present writer that he took the word Sa^xones 
as connected with the name of Carausius, not as it was 
in the time of Carausius himself, but according to the 
meaning it bore in his own time. 

(1) This connection between the names Carausiua 
and Saocones is here made for the first and last time. 
Julian, who is the earliest writer who connects the 
Saxons with either Qtiul or Britain, wrote about seventy 
years after the death of that Usurper ; biit says nothing 
about him. 

(2) The usurpation of Carausius was anterior to the 
division of the empire. 

(3) The word Saxon has not yet appeared in any 
writer of the western division of the empire : not even 
in the Germania of Tacitus. Ptolemy, in whom alone 
we find it, writes in Greek. 

(4) Julian seems to have introduced the name, 
which as a soldier, scholar, and emperor, he might 
easily do. He connects it mth that of the Franks ; 
and the connection was real : and henceforth the two 
words often occur in conjunction. 

This must be borne in mind ; because, if Eutropius 
connected the Saxons with Carausius on adequate evi- 
dence, but evidence that has not come down to us, the 
inferences that may be drawn from his text are impor- 
tant. If, however, he merely associated the names after 
the manner in which we associate words like ' Goths 


and Vamdals^ it goes for very little. At present it is 
enough to say that Gibbon, for one, thinks that the 
word was used in the looser and less important sense. 
He wrote— 

AmelinB Victor calls them Germans. Entropins gives them the 
name of Saxons. But Eutropins lived in the ensuing century, and 
teems to have used the language of hie own timee,— Decline and Fall, 
chap, zxxvi. Note. 

§ 18. These three notices of Julian, of the Notitia, 
and of Eutropius — for the reigns of Constantius, Valen- 
tinian I., and Theodosius — are all that need be given in 
detail. The period is a short one ; and attention has 
been drawn to its shortness. They give us, in the way 
of material and relevant facts, .all that we know con- 
cerning the Saocona in connection with either Gaul or 
Britain, until we find them in Britain. It is necessary 
to add that they do not stand alone. They are supported 
by the testimony of Ammianus Marcellinus and Pacatus 
as actual contemporaries ; while notices of what they did 
are found in Orosius, and the chronicles of Marcellinus 
and Idatius, who wrote somewhat later, but with 
adequate materials. Though none of them name the 
LUtvs^ the earlier point to the same Saxons — the men 
who, when driven back as pirates, were driven back 
to their islands and marshes; the men who lay on 
the Frank frontier ; the men who were suflficiently for- 
midable to be mentioned oftener than most other bar- 
barians. They are certainly mentioned as being all 
this ; but it is more important to remember that, 
except during this period, they are not mentioned at 
all^ — except as actual occupants of either Graiil or 
Britain. It may be that the Saxons of the Gallus 
Littus are hypothetical; but, for this century, the 
Saxons of any other district are still more so. 

§ 19. After the death of Theodosius a slight change 


takes place. The Saxons are associated with new 
enemies of The Empire — the Picts and the Scots ; and 
some of the notices, chiefly from Claudian, carry the 
name so far north that it brings the Saxons connected 
with the history of Britain for this period even up to 
the latitude of Holstein, the Saxon locality of Ptolemy. 
Hence, in passages like the following, we have to con- 
sider whether the Saxons of the Pict alliance were 
Saxons of the Gallic frontier pursued northwards, or 
Saxons of the present Danish frontier who had formed 
an independent alliance with the Picts and Scots. 

Quid rigor setemus caeli ; quid sidera prosont 
Ignotumque fretiim ; maduerunt Sazone fuBO 
Orcades ; incaluit Pictx>rum sanguine Thule, 
Sootorom tumulos flevit glacialis leme. 

Die Quart, Commlatu HanorUt 11. 30-34. 

This is a point upon which the reader must form his 
own judgment. There is evidence as to the Saxons 
having been in what we may call * British waters ;' and 
if they were as formidable as soldiers as they were as 
sailors, there could scarcely be a second opinion upon 
the question-as to whether they had been on the soil of 
our island. Individually I think that they had ; but I 
also think that whether they had or not, they were 
the Saxons of the Gallic frontier and the Littus. I do 
not, however, profess to have traced any Saxons to the 
soil of Britain so definitely as to satisfy one of a dif- 
ferent opinion on this point. The next extract is con- 
clusive ; but there will be a break of thirty years before 
we come to it. 




§ 20. Notice of Prosper Tiro. — ^With Eutropius and 
daudian we get the last two writers who supply us with 
evidence which conveys anything like a fact or a sug- 
gestion as to the Saxons of the fourth century. So 
fiur as it goes such evidence points to the Littua 
Saxonicum ; perhaps exclusively. 

Now the present enquiry is one concerning the in- 
troduction of a Grerman language into Britain, and not 
one concerning the downfiEill of the Romans. If it 
were otherwise, the history might be made continuous, 
and each particular withdrawal of any portion of the 
Soman or British population would claim attention. 
And upon this point we are not without details. Trans- 
fers, of no inconsiderable amount, of soldiers in the 
Boman service from Britain to Graul began as early as 
the time of Maximus; for, though the usurper was 
chosen by the legions of Britain, it was in Gaul that 
he fought his battles. The same was the case with 
Ck>nstantine twenty years afterwards. Here we have 
an undoubted reduction of the Boman and Bomanising 
populations in Britain, but not an evacuation or aban- 

Nor is either of these words found, or even implied, 
in the only known notice of the transfer in Britain of 
the Boman predominance to the Saxons. The notice 
is that of Prosper Tiro. 

THEODosn, xviii. (?). Britannise iiBqne ad hoc tempiiB yariis cladi- 
bos eyentibiiBqae lata (laceratse) in ditionem Sazonum rediguntnr. 

One of the Britains is, doubtless, Bretagne, or 
Armorica. The other may safely be supposed to be 



Britain. The bare possibility of getting more than one 
Britannia in Gaul will be noticed § 23. 

§ 21. Sidonvus Apollinaria. — His Saxons ^ and 
Heruli. — The interval between this notice and the next 
for the Saxons oi Britain is more than a century ; but for 
those of GavX only ten years. This difiference in favour of 
Gaid is because Britain is the first of the two provinces 
which is lost to the Empire ; whereas Gtiul, even when 
other than Imperial, retains the Latin language, and to 
some extent continues the Latin literature. At first, this 
is transitional in character between the classical Latin 
and the proper Frank style. Li Britain there is no 
such continuity or transition, and consequently a much 
greater break in the evidence. 

Another element in the history of Graul for this 
period is the Grothic Like the Franks and Saxoss the 
Goths were Germans, but they were Christian and let- 
tered Germans. As much as this, however, may be 
said of the Bipuarian Franks and the Burgundians. 
Unlike the other Germans of the Empire, the Goths, 
so far as they were Bomanised, were Bomanised after 
the manner of the Greeks, or, at least, that of the 
Eastern Empire ; and the writers of Latin who next 
to those of the Empire mention the Saxons at all are 
those of the Gothic kingdoms of Gtiul, Spain, and 

Aremoricas piratam Saxona tractus 

Sperabat, cui pelle salum snlcare firitannum 

Ludos, e^.9JBSQXoglaucum mare findere lembo.— iS. A, Carm, yiL 369. 

Again: — 

Contra Saxonom pandos *mi/opar<mes quorum tot remiges videns, 
totidem te cemere puto archipirata8.-^i<2. Epist, viii. 6. 

^ Mtopabo. — ^NaTigii piratici genua a Paro insula et Myunte urbe, 
ut placet Tnmebo . . . nomen adeptL Melius Scaliger a fbrma /iuArfj, 
lice est, angusta et oUonga, dictum tradit.— iH(/r«M« (Bu CaDge^ 
^VaMonKia, ^ 


This tells us what kind of vessels these leTnhi were. 
The next notice connects the Saxons with a new 
name — ^that of the Hernli. 

Hie glaueU Heralis genis Tagatur 

Imos oceani colons recessus, 

Algoso prope concolor profundo. — Id, Ep. riii. 9, &c. 

In these extracts the Saxon is a marauder on the 
coast of Brittany, i.e. he is a marauder from either the 
lAUvs Saocanicum or the locality assigned to the Saxons 
by Julian, rather than a Saxon from the parts between 
the Gallic frontier and the Elbe ; and, still more so, 
rather than one from the mouth of the Elbe, or Hol- 
stein. The lemv/us of the metrical is the myoparo of 
the prose extracts — a coasting boat rather than a vessel 
for crossing the sea. 

The word * archipi/rata ' is not a mere rhetorical 
term. It means a second ^Carausius^ for so that 
usurper is called in the Panegyric* of Eumenius ; and 
Panegyric literature was one in which Sidonius was well 

The epithet * glaucus ' applies to the water which 
washed the Saxon Islands in one extract, and to the 
complexion of the Heruli in the other; and this, 
again, has its special meaning. The Heruli can 
be found as Legionaries in the Soman service in 
the NotUia; and not only this, but as part and 
parcel of the Soman 86a-service, and here, as mariners, 
in the same class as the Saxons; and, still more, as 
mariners who can be traced to a district so fietr from 
the mouth of the Loire as the Sea of Azof (PcUua 
Mceotis). We need not enquire too nicely whether, in 
their native country, they were, ethnologically. Fins, 
Mongols, or Turks, but they were certainly Scythians ; 
and to the Scythian or Mongolian complexion the term 

* DelxTtred A.11. 297f { xii 


glaucous undeniably applies. The only question is 
whether the weedy sea {cUgoaum profuTidAim) applies 
to the Palus Maeotis, their original home, or to the 
glaucum mare of the Saxons, with whom, in the time 
of the writer, they are geographically associated. My 
own opinion is that the glaucum Toare of the Saxons 
was also the algoaum profundAim of the Heruli. 
This, however, is a point for the reader to determine 
for himself. 

These Heruli, though only mentioned directly in this passage in 
connection witJi Gaul, probably played a greater part than is assigned 
to them. They were certainly in the Boman service ; and, as certainly, 
not Cherman. They may have acted, how#;ver, as Germans, and have 
been at first partially, afterwards wholly, Germanized. If so, this is the 
only instance in which we get any single member of the Saxon denomi- 
nation (for so we must call it) under his own proper name. 

§ 22. The Sa^xons of Adovacrius. — a.d. 464-5. 
These we find on the Loire. They attack Angers 
(Andegavi), and take hostages from it. The name of 
their captain is Adova^vs, whom Gibbon is inclined 
to identify with the famous Odoacer, who (a.d. 476) 
dethroned the last of the Western* emperors. 

It is against the Empire that Adovacrius leads 
the Saxons. Eventually they are defeated, while their 
islands are taken and subverted. They then form an 
alliance with Childeric, the father of Clovis ; and, under 
the name of Saxons^ we hear no more about them. 

The evidence for these Saxons of Adovacrius is 
Gregory of Tours ; no cotemporary, but a writer with 
whom we can see our way clearly to his authorities. For 
another notice of them he is a cotemporary authority, 
viz., for the t Saacones Bajocassim^i, or Saxons of Bayeux. 

* 'I am almost inclined to believe that he (Odoacer) was the same who 
pillaged Angers and commanded a fleet of Saxon pirates on the ocean.' 
-^Decline and FaU, chap, zxzvi. 

t Sutoria Francorumt z. 9 : also Fredegaritu; Epitomata, 80. 


Again, his cotemporary Venantius Fortunatus 
congratulates the Bishop of Nantes for having civilized, 
if not Christianised, the rough Saxon. 

Aapera gens Saxo, vivens quasi more ferino, 
Te medicante, sacer, bellua fecit ovem. 

These surely represent the Saxons of the lAttua. 
Of Saxons from any other quarter there is, in Gaul, no 
notice whatever. 

§ 23. — Co^fuaum betioeen Britain and Brittany, fc. 

Some points now require notice, because they complicate the history 
of both Ghiul and Britain in the fifth centuiy, and perhaps earlier. 
Without going into the details, I will merely indicat.e them for the sake 
of showing that they have not been overlooked ; and will add that I 
hare taken pains to avoid the use of them where there is any doubt as 
to their application. 

(a) There are certain names, each of which has two, or more, meanings. 

1. There is the word Britannia which may mean either the Britons 
of Britain proper, or the Br^ons of Brittany, Bretagne, oi Armorica. 

2. There is the root G-t — which may mean either the Goths of 
France under the Visigoth Kings, or the Jutes of Jutland. Euthio 
and Geta are varieties of this name ; the latter, probably, merely used 
as a rhetorical term. 

The Saxons, &c., of Theodeberfs Letter to Justinian. — Theode- 
bert, the grandson of Clovis, in the first half of the sixth cen- 
tury, enumerates to the Emperor Justinian the gentes over which he 
had, or claimed to have, dominion. The conquest of Thuriogia was 
complete. The Saxons of Lower Saxony he threatened, if he had not 
to some extent reduced : but we know that the complete subjugation of 
them was not effected till the time of Charlemagne. 

(6) The Geta, Dani, Euthiones, Saxones, and Britanni of Venantius 
Fortunatus, — Venantius Fortunatus writes the foUowing perplexing 
couplet, addressed to the Frank King : — 

Quern Geta, Vasco, tremunt, JJanus, Euthio, Saxo, Britannus; 
Cum patre quos acie te domitasse ferunt. 

We may safely say that the Britannus was a Breton. Saxo certainly 
means the Saxons of Germany ; whose independence is now seriously 
impaired : indeed, some of Uiem have paid tribute. This Saxo is 
separated from the Euthio; as we expect. Euthio and Geta are the 
same word ; and, so far as this is the case, one seems to denote the 
Qoth of Gaul, the other the Jute of Jutland. But the first notice of 


Jutea on the soil of Jutland by a cotemporary writer will not appear 
till the time of Alfred, t.«., three hundred years later: and the 
first by any writer at all will lie latent till the time of Beda, a.d. 750 
(circiter). The same applies to the name Danus ; thongh as early as 
A.D. 615 the famous * Chochilaicus 2>aniM ' had been defeated within 
the Frank boundaries. Still this difference from an actual geographi- 
cal conquest of Denmark is a wide one. These last need not be en- 
larged on ; but the confusion between the two Britains will be noticed 
in the sequel. 

(c) The well-known letter to the Roman general .£tius, in his third 
consulship, sometimes quoted as ' the Groans of the Britons/ in most 
works (and in none more than my own) finds its place, a.d. 449. It is 
now excluded from the text, and that purposely. This is to show that 
the omission is not adcidental. It runs thus : — 

.£tio ter consul! gemitus Britannorum. Kepellunt noB barbari ad 
mare ; repellit nos mare ad barbaros. Inter hsec oriuntur duo genera 
funerum. Ant jugulamur, aut mergimur. 

It is doubtful whether the Britons of this epistle are not, instead 
of the Bn'tons of Britannia, the Brdx>ns of Armorica (Brittany). When 
.£tiu8 was in Gaul, St. Germanus was in Britain. On his return he 
passed through Armorica. The Armoricans at that time had offended 
^tius, and he sent his ally, the barbarous king of the Alani, to chastise 
them. The barbarians, then, are the Alani. 

Letter of Theodehert, 

Id vero quod dignamini esse solliciti in quibus Frovinciis habitemus, 
aut quse gentes nostra sint, Deo adjutore, ditioni subjects, Dei nostri 
misericordia feUciter subactis Thuringis, et eorum Proyinciis acquisitis, 
extinctis ipsorum tunc temporis Kegibus, Norsavorvm gentis nobis 
placata majestas coUa subdidit, Deoque propitio Wisigotis, qui incole- 
bant Franciae septemtrionalem plagam, Pannoniam [Aquitaniam?], cum 
Saxonibtis EuciiSy qui se nobis voluntate propria tradiderunt, per 
Danubium et limitem Fannonise usque in Oceani litoribus, custodiente 
Deo, dominatio nostra porrigitur, — ZetLfs^ 357. 

For Saxones Eucii and Noraavi^ see Ch. VII. 

For the Saxons of Gaul during the fifth century we 
have a small amount of testimony ; for those of Britain 
none. In default of this the analogy of the Saxons of 
Gaul is our best and only guide. 





$ 24. With the exception of tiie two notices of 
Tacitus and Ptolemy with which we began, and which 
preceded those of the Saxons, nothing has hitherto 
been said about the Angli. Much, no doubt, has been 
said about the Saxons ; and even the Franks and Ale- 
manni have been found in connection with Britain ; 
but, in spite of their having given their name to the 
island, not a line has been written about the Angli. 
This has been the case simply because there was nothing 
to say. From the date of Ptolemy, about a.d. 139, to 
that of the forthcoming notice from Procopius, about 
A.D. 548, their name, in either Greek or Latin litera- 
ture, never appears. 

The Angili of Procopius^ a.d. 5. — The strange 
character of his narrative, and the character, stranger 
still, of his geography, have made the text of Procopius 

His geography calls the Britons B/>/rTtt>i/«9, and 
Britain Bpirria* He makes it an island. For its re- 
lations to the Rhine and Elbe see Chapters VIL, VIII. 
The BplTTtoytt were a prolific people, and they sent out 
annually a certain nimaber of their population to estab- 
lish themselves in fresh coimtries. But their area of 
conquest must be limited ; for they always go on foot. 
They must do this, for such an animal as the horse has 
never been known in Britain. Should an embassy, or 
the like, from the riding part of the world enter Britain, 
there is no means of getting them either off, or on, 
horseback except by lifting them up or down. For 
rowing, however, they are imrivalled. Every man on 
board ship takes an oar, and, such being the case, sails 


are wholly dispensed with. Still more eztraordinaiy 
axe the functions of these islanders as conveyers of the 
dead. They take turns with each other in the business 
of conveying the spirits of the departed to a mysterioiM 
island — Brittia— which seems, name for name, to be 
the island in which they themselves dwell. However, 
they have to cross a sea or strait. This being their 
general duty, each division, as its turn comes round, 
retires at nightfall to its own dwelling, and waits for 
the call of its conductor. The sudden shaking of the 
doors and the voice of one unseen announce his ap- 
proach. An irresistible influence carries them to the 
seaside, where they find vessels in readiness — not their 
own, but strange and imknown ones. These they man, 
each taking his oar. Not a passenger, however, can 
they see. Yet they fed the presence of many , 
for the vessel sinks to within finger's breadth of the 
water. An hour brings them to Brittia — provided they 
have rowed. If they aail^ the voyage takes a night and 
a day. There they discharge their unseen cargo, and 
return ; the vessel sinking no deeper than the keel. 
From first to last they see no one ; but a voice announces 
to them the names and dignities of their passengers ; 
' also if women happen to cross over with them, they 
call over the names of the husbands with whom they 
lived. These, then, are the things which the men of 
that district declare to take place.' 

§ 25. The ethnology, however, of Procopius is more 
definite than his geography. 

From Procopius. 

Three nations extremely populous occupy the island of Britain. 
One king is at the head of each. The names for these nations are Anglic 
Phrissones, and (of the same name as the island) Britons. Such is 
the manifest populousness of these nations, that every year, in great 
numbers, they migrate ^m thence, and with their wives and children 
go over to the Franks. 


Bptrriop 8^ rV y9<roy iBimi r^a mXiKurOpwr^rara lx<>v<^<* BoctXci^s 1^^ 
^ oMfP lirtUrry l^i^niKw, *Oy6ftara 8i icctrou roir I9yc<ri ro^ois 
'AtyIAm jccU ^pur(r6tfts letd ol rp y^a^ dfi^yv/jLoi Bplrruvtf roaaWii 8i ^ 
TiMc TWP I9ywy voXvai^fMnrfa ^aii^rreu 090*0 6otc &i^ Toy fros icara xoAAo5s 
iw$M€ furtu^urrdiuwoi ^iv yw€u(i Ka\ watalw is ^pdyyovs x^poSo-tv. 

Bdktm Gothicufn, iv. 20. 

This is the first notice since that of Ptolemy, and it 
is the .only one between Ptolemy and Beda. (See 
Chapters VIL, VIIL) 




§ 26. A.D. 597. — Ethelbert is king of Kent ; his 
queen is a Frank princess. Gregory I., then Pope, 
enjoins a Frank mission to promulgate tlie Christianity 
of the Franks. The Frank king sends interpreters, 
and St. Augustin is at the head of the mission. 

Hence in 597 there is no doubt as to the fact of the 
mother-tongue of the present English having become 
thoroughly established in Britain ; in the southern parts 
at least. It was a language, too, intelligible to the 
Franks ; at least to the Franks of the western division 
of the Frank kingdom. 

The evidence of this lies in the Papal Letters, 
which, though they did not reach England imtil the 
latter part of the next century, are to be found in 

§ 27. TheAngli of Pope Oregory L — The evidence 
of Beda himself as a cotemporary witness is about a 
century later. He died a.d. 737. For the mission of 
St. Augustin it is the Papal Letters that constitute 
the evidence. The story of the Pope's interview with 


the English children in the slave-market, and his play 
on the words Angli and Angel/i, rests on that of Beda. 
It is, of course, conclusive to the fact of certain occu- 
pants of Britain bearing the name Angle or Engle; 
and of what is of more importance. Angle or Engle 
being a name by which they spoke of themselves, not 
merely a name which was applied to them by others. 
The truth of the story has but little to do with the 
matter ; and the date not much. But that the chil- 
dren from the kingdom of Deira, or the district of 
Northumberland, were English in the way that a Ger- 
man is a Deutsche^ and not in the way that he is Ger- 
man or an AUemand (i.e. something that he is called 
by other people), is a fact of great importance, though 
one that we may easily underv^alue. We best appreciate 
it by remembering how little, in this respect, we know 
about the concurrent name Saxon, concerning which 
we have no evidence whatever that any occupant of 
any one of the Saxon districts ever applied it to him- 
self. Neither do we know what the Saxons did call 
themselves. They were called Saxons by the Romans, 
by the Britons, and by the Gauls ; but what they called 
themselves is unknown. The name may have been 
Angle, but it is quite as likely that it was something 

§ 28. Authorities of Beda — for the Seventh and 
Sixth Centuries, — If full justice is to be done both to 
Beda and the earlier authorities with whom he is at 
variance, his account may be divided into three parts. 

1. The Century in which he wrote, i,e. the Eighth. 
— Here he writes of what was to be foimd in England 
during the time of his own life ; and, doing this, writes 
with an authority which it would be vain to impugn. 

2. The Seventh Century. — This ^ves us, within a 
few years, the introduction of Christianity and several 


of its imniediate results, one of which would be the 
use of the Latin language as that of the Church, and 
(unless it existed before) the use of the alphabet. 
Under these conditions we get the elements of a truly 
historical record ; and, although we have no remains of 
it, it is probable that Beda may have had the opportu- 
nity of availing himself of it. More than this, for the 
latter half of the century, there were the early cotem- 
poraries of Beda, to whom he may have applied. This 
we know to have been the case. We know, too, that 
there was a fair amoimt of literary activity during 
the period. One of the Christian duties of the recent 
converts to Christianity in England was that of preach- 
ing the Gospel to their near kinsmen on the Continent, 
who, in the parts north of the Bhine and Ems, were 
still pagans* This they performed honourably. They 
called the Grermans of these districts Old Saxons, an 
important name, because it shows that the descent of 
the English from them was recognised. It is also a 
convenient name, because it means the Saxons of the 
Continent as opposed to the Saxons of England. 
These latter, even in Beda's time, are called Anglo^ 

Between Beda and his cotemporaries we get trust- 
worthy evidence for at least the latter half of the 
seventh century, especially as the cotemporaries whom 
we appeal to are not imaginary or merely possible ones. 
Beda himself tells us, not only that there were some of 
them to whom he applies, but he tells us who they 
were and upon what points they instructed him. Thus 
he mentions by name Albinus and Nothelm for Kent ; 
Bishop Daniel for Sussex and the Isle of Wight ; the 
monks of Lestingham for Mercia and part of Essex ; 
with Cyneberct and others for Lincoln. For the pro- 
vince of Northimiberland Beda was his own authority. 


For the first half, however, of the century the value 
of Beda's statements decreases, though not to any great 
degree. There is still, without doubt, some learning 
in the country, and some records; and certain state- 
ments founded upon them, whether found in Beda him- 
self, or the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, or in a British 
historian, deserve credit. Hence, the statement that 
Eadwin defeats Ethelfrith, and soon after invades Elmet, 
and that Elmet is, then, British, is one which we may 
safely adopt as a datum for calculating the rcUe at 
which our language extended itself. 

§ 29. Bedd*8 Authorities for the Fifth Century — 
what where they ? — Of the authorities (possible or pro- 
bable) of Beda for the interval between the evacuation 
of Britain by the Bomans in the middle of the fifth 
century and the date that may reasonably be given to 
the earliest English writers upon England, about the 
middle of the sixth century, there are four divisions. 

1. The traditions, or legends, or whatever we may 
call them, of the Germans themselves. Tacitus mentions 
their carmi/na antiqua. So do the historians of the 
time of Charlemagne. It is doubtful, however, whether 
they would supply what is very conspicuous in the ac- 
coimt of Beda, a series of dates. The genealogies are 
not improbable ; but each must be tried by its o\ni 

2. The British records, notices, or allusions. — Of 
these the value, whatever it may be, is possibly under- 
valued rather than over-valued. 

3. The Frank records, notices, allusions, or colla- 
teral illustrations. — These, as we have seen, fall into 
two divisions. 

a. Those that bear the old classical type of the 
Empire ; like the extracts from Sidonius Apollinaris 
and Venantius Fortunatus ; and 


b. Those that represent the proper Frank literature. 
Between the two we get a continuity of some kind, 
plain, visible, and self-asserting; and in this, as has 
been indicated, we get, imperfect as it is, our best basis 
for historical investigation. 

4. The authorities he especially mentions. Of these 
the three that have come down to us, viz., Gonstantius, 
the author of a Life of St. Germanus, and written about 
forty years after his death ; Grildas, and Orosius. The 
first two tell us little more than that there were Saxons 
on the island in the middle of the fifth century. The 
third tells us even less. 

§ 30. As a cotemporary witness the facts to which 
Beda most especially speaks are — 

1. The name Angles, which has already been noticed. 

2. The presence, at the time he was writing, of 
Jutes in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. This will 
be noticed in the sequel. 

3. The existence of a language in Britain which 
was neither Latin nor German, neither Scotch nor 
British, viz., the Pict. This there is no need to discuss. 

Between the different current accounts of this period 
the dates and details are as follow : — 

▲.D. 449. Hengist and Horsa, in Kent and Hampshire, and the Isle 
of Wightr— Jutes. 

A.D. 477. EUa, in Snssex — Saxons. 

▲.D. 496. Cerdic and Cynric, in Wessez — Saxons. 

A.D. 627-680. Settlement in Essex — Saxons. 

▲.D. 647. Settlement in Northumberland, nnder Ida — Angles. 

▲.D. ? — But easier than the last, and later than the last but one. 
In Norfolk and Suffolk (East Ajigliek)— Eastern Angles, 

§ 31. Beda^a Geography. — What Beda writes as a 
geographer, though written by a cotemporary, is by no 
means unexceptionable, partly because the history con- 
nected with the countries he mentions is retrospective, 
and, partly, because the positive geographical knowledge 


of the time was imperfect. The knowledge that even 
the most special geographers had of the countries to 
which certain populations were to be referred bore no 
proportion to the knowledge they had of the populations 
themselves apart from the original occupancies. This 
means that they knew the Saxons as they appeared in 
Gaul or Britain without knowing what they were in 
their own country or where that country was. They 
knew the Dd.nes as invaders of the Netherlands before 
they knew anything about Denmark; and they knew 
almost every one of the so-called northern barbarians in 
the same imperfect way. What Beda writes is as follows : 

' Advenerant autem de tribus Germanise populis fortioribus, id est 
SaxonibuSt AngliSj Jutis, De Jutarum origine sunt CantuarU et Vec- 
tuarii ; hoc e»t ea gens, qus Vectam tenet insnlam, et ea, quae asqae 
hodie in proTincia Occidentalium Saxonum Jutarum natio nominatur, 
posita coiltra ipsam insulam Vectam. De Saxonibua^ id est ea regione, 
quse nunc Antiqvorum Saxonum cognominatur, venere OrUntales Saxtmes, 
Meridiani SaxaneSy Occidui Saxonea. Forro de AnglUy hoc est de ilia patria, 
q}XSBAngiUu8 dicitor, etabeo tempore usque hodie manere desertus int^r 
provincias Jutarum et Saxonum perhibetur, OrientaUs Angli, Mediter- 
ranei Angli^ Merdi^ tota Nordhimbrorum progenies/ 

The following, little more than a translation from 
the Latin, is from the ' Saxon Chronicle' (a.d. 449) : — 

' Da comon )>a men of >rim ' They came ftoxn. three powers 

megtSum Germanise, of Eald-Seax- of Germany, from Old Saxons, 

mn, of Anglom, of JotunL from Angles, from Jutes. 

* Of Jotum comon Cantware and ' From the Jutes came the in- 

Wihtware, [vBt is seo m»ia^, )>e ni habitants of Kent and of Wight, 

earda)> on Wiht, and >8et cyn on that is, the race that now dwells 

West-Sezum <Se man gyt hset lit- in Wight, and that tribe amongst 

nacyn. Of Eald-Seaxum comon the West-Saxons which is yet 

East-Seaxan, and Su'S-Seaxan, and called the Jute kin. From the 

West-Seaxan. Of Angle comon (se Old-Saxons came the East-Saxons, 

a sil^n st6d westig betwix I^tum and South • Saxons, and West- 

and Seaxum) £48t-£ngle, Middel- Saxons. From Angle (which has 

Angle, Meaice, and ealle NorSym- since always stood waste betwixt 

bnu' the Jutes and Saxons) came the 

East-Angles, Ifiddle-Angles, Mer- 
cians, and aU the Northumbiians.' 


Thirdly ; Alfred writes — 

* Comon of jvym folcom >a ' Game they of three folk the 

ftnuDgMtan Gennanise, f^set of strongest of Germany ; that of the 

Saznm, and of Angle, and of Gea- Saxons, and of the Angles, and of 

tarn; of G^atom fniman sindon the Geats. Of the Geats origi- 

Gantwnre and Wiht-scetan, ^t is nally are the Kent people and the 

seo |)66d se'WihtHteulondonear- Wiht-settlers, that is the people 

da«.' which Wiht the Island live on.' 

In the way of geography there is one of long standing, 
Tiz^ the derivation of the Angles from so insignificant a 
district as the present Angeln : a district which Beda 
himself derives from Angulus. In some sense the 
statement may be true, inasmuch as there may have 
been Angli in parts between Flensbmrg and Sleswick 
(the present district of Anglen, rather less than the 
comity of Rutland), just as they were in Britain. But 
that Beda's Angulus was, in any sense, the country of 
the Angles of Ptolemy and Tacitus, few believe. 

The second is, I believe, one of my own making, 
and it is to the effect that the Jutes of Beda were not 
the Jutes of Jutland, but the Goths of Craul. As little 
in the present enquiries depends upon it, and as I have 
gone into my reasons elsewhere, nothing more will be 
said about it. 

$ 32. The fair, and, at the same time, the legiti- 
mate way of dealing with a great writer in a dark age 
like Beda is to value him according to the lights of his 
time, not only when they are against him, but when 
they are for him. Something he may have known 
about an age to which he was nearer by many centuries 
than his critics, from the mere &ct of his proximity ; 
though we of the nineteenth century fail to see our way 
to it. And when this is the case he may be followed 
in fidth rather than on conviction. But tliat which he 
reoordfl must not only be in itself probable, but must 


have nothing that can be set against it* From this 
point of view his details as to the several invasions of 
Britain must he taken each on its own particular merits. 
As a rule, we may assign some reality to the dates ; be- 
cause they are not the elements in a narrative that can 
easily, or without grounds of some kind, be invented. 
But, though real in themselves, they may readily be 
associated with wrong events. Hengist, as an impor- 
tant agent of some kind, is probably real ; but not as 
the brother of Horsa, and the father of uEsc, and a race 
of Kentish kings. 

The objections to Beda's evidence, so far as our 
language is concerned, are reducible to a single point. 
But it is an important one. 

His Hengists, and even his Horsas and Ports, may 
have done all that he, along with the Anglo-Saxon 
Chronicle, assigns to them. But they are not the first 
Germans who did work of the same kind ; and these 
Germans must not be excluded. ' Angles ' the men of 
East Anglia and Northumberland may have called 
themselves ; but that the Saxons did so is, in my mind, 
as imlikely as it is that a German called himself an 
Allemand ; though that, in time, both may have adopted 
it I do not deny. This is as much as need be said at 
present. How Germans, under some designation or 
other, are likely to have found a footing in Britain, 
and how the name Scucon may have followed them, we 
have seen ; but of evidence that either a real Angle 
population, or such a name as Saxon, existed in any 
part of Germany between the Shine and the Elbe, we 
have not a fraction. 

§ 33. The conclusions from the review of the evidence 
that has been laid before us, even when taken for every- 
thing connected with the names Angle and Saxon^ are, at 
the best, but limited ; and when we bring them to bear 


apon the single point of the introduction of either the 
Saxon name or a Saxon population into Britain, we 
only get two authorities, Prosper and Beda. 

Between these the contrast is decided* Prosper 
manifestly considers the Saxons as men who had, for 
some time before, been in relations with Britain, Gaul, 
and the Empire. He writes at the close of a period in 
which we know that such was really the case ; and he 
writes from Guul, where he had the opportunity of 
knowing who and what these Saxons actually were. 
Moreover, he evidently ma^es the reduction of Britain 
the final act of a contest of some previous duration. 
Beda, in this respect, is his exact opposite. With Beda, 
until the time of Hengist, South Britain has been ex- 
clusively Boman and British ; harassed, indeed, by the 
Picts and Scots of the north, but still unvisited by 
any Germans whatever * ; for the first Germans that 
Beda mentions are the Jutes of Hengist that are called 
in by Vortigem as allies against the invaders from 
Scotland ; Britain itself having been abandoned by its 
original and natural protectors, the Romans. That the 
Saxons were known for, very nearly, a century earlier, 
either as enemies or friends of the Bomans, he does not 
tell us. He rather leaves us to infer the contrary. Least 
of all does he tell us that they had been the scourges 
of Boman Britain ; and that in alliance with the Picts. 
In short, with Prosper Tiro the history of the Saxons 
as the conquerors of Britain ends ; whilst with Beda 
it begins. 

* For these, as well as for the Jutes of Hampshire and the Isle of 
Wight, see §§ 116-117. 

34 EELIAin). 



§ 34. The Old Saxon. — The political and geogOr 
phical history of the Saxons of Britain must be read 
by the light we get from Oavl. 

Their ethnological and philological history mast be 
read by the light we get from Oermany. 

In respect to the language, there is no doubt as to 
the part of Germany with which it is the most con- 
venient to begin; for there is one old dialect that almost 
forces itself upon us. It was for more than a century 
treated as the Saxon of Britain, or England, i.e. as 
J.7i^{o-Saxon ; the first manuscript (for a long time 
the only one) having been discovered in an English 
library, and treated as English accordingly. It is known 
by the title of Heliand, i.e. Healer or Saviour of 
Mankind, It was a metrical Gospel Harmony. 

But though found in England its character was so 
peculiar as to require an hypothesis to account for it; 
and the doctrine that a certain amount of Danish in- 
fluence was the cause of it so &r took form as to establish 
the term Z)a7U)-Saxon. In the eyes, then, of Hickes, 
Lye, and the older Anglo-Saxon scholars, the Heliand 
was a DanO'Saxon composition, and so it continued 
until the present century; when not only was its Danish 
character denied, but its Westphalian origin was indi- 
cated. It is now called Old Saxon. 


Hdiand, pp. 12, 13. (Schmellet^s Edition.) 

Luc. n. 8-13. 

Tho uuard managun cud, Then it was to many known, 

Obar tbesa uuidon nuerold. Oyer Uiis wide world. 



Unardoe ftntfandan, 

Thea thar, ehnsealcos, 

XJta Quaran, 

Uiieios an unahtn, 

Uniggeo gomeao, 

Pehaa altar felda. 

Gtiaahun flnistri an tnne 

Telatan an Infte ; 

Endi qnam lioht Gk)d68, 

Unannm thnrh thni nnolcan ; 

£ndt thea nuardoa thar 

Bifeng an them felda. 

Sie nuidun an forhtnn tho, 

Thea man an ira moda. 

Giaahnn thar mahtigna 

Godes Engil cnman ; 

The im tegegnes sprao. 

Het that im thea nnardoa — 

• Uuiht ne antdredin 

Ledee fon them liohta. 

Ic seal en quod he liobora thing, 

Suido nnarlico 

Uuilleon seggean. 

Cudean craft mikil. 

Kn is Krist geboran, 

An thesero selbun naht, 

Salig bam Godes, 

An tbera Davides buig, 

Drohtin the godo. 

That is mendislo 

Manno cnnneos, 

Aliaro firiho fnima. 

Thar gi ina fidan mogun, 

An Bethlemabuig, 

Bamo rikiost. 

Hebbiath that te tecna, 

That ic en gitellean mag, 

Uuarun uuordnn, 

That he thar binundun ligid, 

That kind an enera cribbium, 

Tho he si enning obar al 

Erdon endi himiles, 

Endi obor eldeo bam, 

Uneroldes nualdand.' 

Baht so he tho that uaord getprac, 


The words thej discovered, 

Those that there, as horse-grooms, 

Without were. 

Men at watch, 

Horses to tend, 

Cattle on the field. 

They saw the darkness in twain 

Dissipated in the atmosphere, 

And came a light of Gt>d 

— through the welkin ; 

And the words there 

Caught on the field. 

They were in fright then 

The men in their mood. 

They saw there mighty 

God's angel come ; 

That to them face-to-fiice spake. 

It bade thus them these words 

' Dread not a whit 

Of mischief from the light. 

I shall to you glad things, 

Very true. 

Commands utter. 

Show strength great. 

Now is Christ bom. 

In this solf-same night ; 

The blessed child of God, 

In the David's city, 

The Lord the good. 

That is exultation 

To the races of men. 

Of all men the advancement. 

There ye may find him 

In the city of Bethlehem, 

The noblest of children. 

Ye have as a token 

That I tell ye 

True words, 

That he there swathed lieth. 

The child in a crib. 

Though he be king over all 

Earth and Heaven, 

And over the sons of men, 

Of the world the Rulec.' 

Hight as ha that woid ai^e^ 




So uuard thar engilo te them 

Unrim cuman, 

Helag heriskepi, 

Fon hebnnuuanga, 

Fogar folc Godes, 

Endi filu sprakun, 

Lofuuord manag, 

Liudeo herron ; 

Afhobun tho helagna sang, 

Tho sie eft te hebanuuanga 

Uundun thurh thiu uuolcan. 
Thea uuardus hordun, 
Huo thiu engilo craft 
Alomahtigna God, 
Suido uuerdlico, 
Uuordun louodun. 
' Diurida si no,* quadun sie, 
' Brohtine sclbun, 
An them hohoston 
Himilo rikeu ; 
Endi fridii an erdu, 
Firiho barnum, 
Goduuilligun gumun, 
Them the God antkennead, 
Thurh hluttran hugi/ 

So was there of Angels to them. 

In a multitude, come 

A holy host, 

From the Heayen-plains, 

The fair folk of God, 

And much thej spake 

Praise-words manj, 

To the Lord of Host£. 

They raised the holy song, 

As they back to the Heaven- 

Wound through the welkin. 
The words they heard, 
How the strength of the Angels 
The Almighty God, 
Very worthily. 
With words praised. 
' Love be there now,* quoth they, 
' To the Lord himself 
On the highest 
Kingdom of Heaven, 
And peace on earth 
To the children of men, 
Goodwilled men 
Who know God, 
Through a pure mind.' 

To this add *The Legend of St. Boniface, or 
Fragmentum de Festo Omnium Sanctorum,' from an 
Essen MS. 

Vui lesed tho Scs Bonifacius Pauos an Eoma uuas, that he bedi 
thena Kiesur aduocatum, that he imo an Bomo en hus geii, that thia luidi 
uuilon Pantheon heton, wan thar uuorthon alia afgoda inna begangans. 
So he it imo tho iegiuan hadda, so wieda he it an uses Drohtines era, 
ende usero Fmen See Marium, endi allero Cristes martiro ; te thiu, also 
thar er inna begangan vuarth thiu menigi thero diuuilo, that thar nu inna 
begangan uuertha thiu gehugd allero godes heligono. He gibod the that 
al that folk this dages also the kalend Nouember anstendit (?) te kerikCT 
quami, endi, also that godlika thianust thar al gedon was, so wither ge- 
warf manno gewilik fra endi blithi te hus. Endi thanana so warth ge- 
wonohed that man hodigo, ahter allero thero waroldi, beged thia gehugd 
allero Godes heligono, te thiu so vuat so vui an allemo themo gera uer- 
gomeloBon, that wi et al hodigo getuHon; ^n^ \]b&X.'^, thar thero heli- 


gODO gething, bekuman te themo evigon liua, helpandemo nsemo 

In English {literal). 

We read that when St. Boniface, Pope, was in Borne, he bade the 
Csesar Advocatus to give him a house in Kome, that the people whilom 
called Pantheon, when there were all the heathen gods therein gone. 
When he had given it to him so hallowed he it to our Lord's honour, and 
our Lad/s, the Holy Mary, and all the Christ's martyrs, to the end that, 
even as the multitude of devils had gone therein, now should go in the 
thought on all Chxl's saints. He bade that all the folk this day, the 
kalends of November, (?) to church should come, and also that when 
godly service there all done was, every man should depart glad and 
blithe home. And thence was the custom that all men, at the present 
time, over all the world, take thought of all God's saints, so that what 
we in all the year have forgotten, we should to-day fulfil, and that we, 
through their holy intercession, should reach the everlasung life, our 
Lord helping. 

See Dorow, Derikmaler Alter Sprache und Kunat 
1823. (l 40.) 

§ 35. The Old Saxon Abrenunciation. — This is a 
fragment, but one that, as far as it goes, is in the form 
of a catechism, or sacrament, for the Old Saxon converts 
from Paganism. It is Westphalian, but not so specially 
fixed in respect to its locality as the Essen EoU, oi 
Kotulus Essensis, the Formula Essensis Confessionis, 
and the Frekkenhorst EoU, of which the locality is 
denoted by the names. The EoUs, or Muniments, con- 
sist of little more than lists of dues or payments to the 
Essen and Frekkenhorst monasteries. 

The Abrenunciation is as follows : — 

Q. Forsachis tu diobolse? 

R. Ec forsacho diabolse, end allum diobolgelde; end ec forsacho 
allum diobolgeldse, end aUum dioboles nuercum, and uuordum, Thunar 
ende Woden, ende Saxnote ende allum them unholdum the hiro genotas 

Q. Gelobis tu in Got Alamehtigan Fadaer? 

R, Ecgeloho in Got Alamehtig^ Fadaer. 


Q, Gelobis tu in Crist Godes Suno ? 
B. Ec gelobo in Crist Gtodea Suno. 
Q. Gelobis tu in HalogaB Gast ? 
R, £c gelobo in Halogan Gost. 

In English, 

Q. Renouncest thou the Deyil ? 

R. I renounce the Devil, and all Devil-guilds ; and'I renounce all 
Devil-guilds, and all the Devil's works, and words ; Thunor, and Woden, 
and Saxnot, and all the unholy (ones) who are their fellows. 

Q. Believest thou in God the Almighty Father ? 

R, I believe in Gt>d, the Almighty Father. 

Q, Believest thou in Christ, God's Son? 

B, I believe in Christ, Gtod'a Son. 

Q. Believest thou in the Holy Ghost ? 

B. I be^eve in the Holy Ghost. 

§ 36. The Hdia/nd is referred to the parts about 
Munster. Hence we may take Munster as a starting 
point ; and, drawing a line due west until we reach the 
North Sea between the Maas and Scheldt, compare what 
we find in the German district of Westphalia, and the 
Dutch and Flemish districts of Overijsell, Brabant, and 
Flanders, with what we find about Essen and Frekken- 
horst in G-ermany ; and also with the nearest cotem- 
porary Anglo-Saxon of England. The presumptions are 
that when we reach the old localities of the Salian 
Franks and the Saxons of Julian we ought to find a 
form of speech more English than even the Heliand. 
But, then, it is not certain that we shall find any- 
thing at all. 

The nearest approach to this, and it probably 
lies north of the line, is found under two names, the 
Oloasce Lipaienses and the Carolinian Psalms. Of these 
names, the first arose out of the fact of the learned 
Lipsius having drawn attention to them. He contented 
himself, however, with selecting certain words — Oloaaea. 
The Srst part of the text was published by Von de 


Hagen, a.d. 1810, with the opinion that they belonged 
to the time of Gharleniagne, an opinion adopted by 
Tpeij and Clarisse, &om whom the following extract is 
taken. The version is treated by the editors as the 
Saxon of Holland. 

From the text of A, Ype{;, Taalkundiff Mageyn, P. i. No. 1. p. 74. 


1. Gehori Gk)t gebet min, in ne fiiraar[p] bida mina ; ihenke te mi 
in gehori mi. 

2. GidiouTit bin ic an tilogon minro, in mistrot bin fan stimmon 
fnindes, in fan arbeide sundiges. 

3. Unanda geneigedon in mi unreht, in an abnlge onsnote nnaron 

4. Herta min gidionit ist in mi forhta dnodis fiel onir mi. 

5. Forhta in binonga qnamon ooir mi, in bethecoda mi ihtnBter- 

6. In ic quad * nnie sal genan mi fetheron also dnaon, in ic fluigon 
sal, in raston saU 

7. Ecco ! finoda ic fiiende, ende bleif in an endi. 

In thepruent Dutch of Holland. 

1. Hoor, Qot ! nujn gebod, eu verwerp niet m^ne bede ! denk tot (aan) 
mij, en boor mig. 

2. Ontroeid ben ik, en m\jne bezigheden, en mistrootig ben ik van 
de stem des viands en van het leed (m\j) van den zondigen (aangedaan). 

3. Want z^' neigden op mijj het onreght, en in yerbolgenheid waren 
K\j m\j onzoet. 

4. Mijn hart is ontroeid in m^, en de vries des doods overviel mij. 

5. Vries en bering kwamen over m^, en dnistemiss bede. 

6. En ik zoide, ' wie zal mij geyen vederen als Tan eene dnif ; en ik 
zal yliegen en zal rosten ? ' 

7. Zie ik yeroerde yliedende end bleef in de woestijn. 

§ 37. HiLDBBBAin) AXD Hathubrand. 

Ik gihorta dat seggen, I heard that saj, 

Dat sie urheiton senou mnotin, That thej challenged in single 

Hildebraht end Hadnbraht^ Hildebraht and Hathnbraht, 

Untar heruin tnem. Between the two armies. 

Gamton sie, ircv gnthhatpom, They made wad-if t^c^x ^«x-«xmXj^ 



Giirtun file iro snert ana, 

Helidos nhsx ringa, 

Do sie to dero ittin ritun. 

Hiltibraht gimohalta, 

Heribrajites snne. 

Her was heroro man, 

Ferahes frotoro, 

Her frsLgen gistuont (?) 

Fohem wortum : ' wer sin fiider 

' Fireo in folcke, 

* Eddo weliches onuosles da sis. 
' Ibu du mi aenan sages, 

' Ik mideo are-wet, 

* Chind in chnninchriche, 

* Chad ist min al Irmendeot/ 
Hadabraht gimahalti, 
Hillibrantes sane : 

' Dat sagetun me 

* Usere liati alte anti frote, 
' Dea erhena waran, 

* Dat Hilbrant haette min fater, 
' (Ih heitta Hadabrant). 

' Forn her ostar gehaeit, 

* Floh her Otachres nid. 

They girt their swords on, 
Heroes oyer the ring, 
When they to the war rode. 
Hildebrand spoke, 
Heribrant's son. 
He was a high man, 
Of age the wiser, 

He asked 

With few words : ' who his fathir 

' Of men in the folk, 

* Or of what kin thoa beest. 
' If thoa me onlj sayest, 

' I forbear strife 

' Child in kingdom, 

' Known to me is all mankind.' 

Hathabrath answered, 

Hildebrand's son : 

' That said they to me 

* Oar people old and wise, 

* Who of yore were, 

' That my father hight Hildebrand, 

* (I hight Hadhabraht). 

* Formerly, hence, eastward, de- 


* Fled Odoacer*8 spite. 

* Tot ist Hiltibraht, 
' Heribrantes sano.' 
Hildebrant gimahalta 
Heribrantes sano : 

* Wela gisiha ih, 

* In dinemhrastim, 

* Dat du haoes keine herron goten, 
' Dat da noh bi desemo riche, 

* Reccheo ni warte.' 
Do laettun se aerist 
Asckim scritan, 
Scarpen scarim, 

Dat in dem sciltim stont. 

* Dead is Hildebrant^ 
' Heribrant's son.' 
Hildebrant answered 
Heribrant's son : 

* Well see I, 

' In thy harness, 

' That thoa no good master hast, 

' That thoa still by this kingdom, 

* Hero art not* 
Then let they erst 
With axes stride. 
With sharp showers. 
That on the shields dashed. 

Hewnn harmilicco 
Haitte scilti 
Unti im iro lintan 
lAittilo wurtan. 

They hewed harmfiilly 
The white shields 
And to them then linden 
Little were (became). 


§ 38. TatiaTCa Ooapel Harmony. — The following 
is called Frank. The term, however, is geographical 
and political rather than philological. 

Tmi Gk>8FEL Habmony of Tatxan, t. i. 8. (Edit Graff.) 

1. Uanm th6 hirtB in theio lantskeffi nuahhante, inti biLiltante 
nahtuuahta nbar iro eunit 

Qnam thaia gotes engil, inti gLstnont n4h in, inti gotes berahtnessi 
bischein sie, inti giforhtnn sie in th6 in xnihhileio forhta. 

2. Inti quad in therengil: ni cnret i& forhten, ih sagen i^mihliilan 
gifehon, ther is allemo folke, bi thiu nnanta giboran ist i& hiutu 
Heilant, ther iat Christ trohtin in Dauides bnrgi ; 

Thaz si ii si z^ichane, thaz ir findet kin mit tuochon bivmntanez 
inti gilegitaz in crippa. 

8. Th6 sluimo nuard thar mit themo engile meni^ himilisches 
heres got lobontin inti qnedentin : 

Tinrida si in then hohiston gote, inti in erdn si sibba mannon gnotes 

§ 39. Otfrid. — The next is from a part further 
soutii than the Harmony ; probably south of the 
Mayne ; in which case it is, geographically and ethno* 
logically, Alemannic. The writer himself calls it 
Frank, The extract is, again, from a Gospel Harmony. 
Krist is the title : Otfrid the name of the composer. 
It is High German. 

Kkist, i. 12. (Edit. Graft) 

Tho nuarun thar in hinte hirta haltente ; 

thes febes datnn nuarta. uuidar fianta. 
Zi in qnam boto sconi. engil siinenti, 

ioh nunrtnn sie inliuhte. fon himilsgen liohte. 
Forahtnn sie in tho gahun. so sinan anasahun ; 

ioh hintarquamun harto. thes gotes boten nnorto. 
Sprah ther gotes boto sar. ' Ih seal iu sagen nnuntar. 

fa seal sin fon gote heil. nales forahta nihein. 
Ih seal in sagen imbot. gibot ther himilisgo got ; 

onh nist ther er gihorti. so fronisg amnti. 
Thes unirdit nuorolt sinu. zi eunidon blidn. 

ioh al giscaft thiu in uuorolti. thesa erdon ist onh dretenti, 
Ninuni boran habet thiz lant, then himilisgon Heilant; 

Theist dmhtin krist gnater. fon inngem muater. 
In betbleem thine koninga, thie nnanin alle thanana, 


fon in uuaid ouh giboran. iu sin mnater magad soonik 
Sagen ih in, goate man. nuio ir nan scnlut findan, 

zeichen ouh gizami. thoruh thaz seltsani. 
Zi theru burgi faret hinana. ir findet, bo ih iu aageta, 

kind niunui boranaz. in kripphun gilegitaz. 
Tho qnam unz er zin tho sprah. engilo heriscaf, 

himilisgn menigi. bub alio singenti — 

* In himilriches hohi. si goto guallichi ; 

Si in eidn fridu ouh alien, thie fol sin goatee uniUen.' 

The same, in English, 

Then there were in the land herdsmen feeding : 

Of their cattle they made watch against foes. 
To them came a messenger fair, an angel shining, 

And they became lit with heavenly light. 
They feared, suddenly as on him th^y looked ; 

^d followed much the words of Gt>d's messenger : 
Spake there Ghod's messenger strait, ' I shall to you say wondeis. 

To you shall there be from Gh)d health ; fear nothing at alL 
I shall to you say a message, the bidding of the heavenly Gk)d : 

Also there is none who has heard so glad an errand. 
Therefore becomes this world for ever blithe, 

And all creatures that in the world are treading this earth. 
Newly borne has this land the heavenly Saviour, 

Who is the Lord Christ, good, from a young mother. 
In Bethlehem of the kings they were all thence— 

From them was also bom his mother, a maid £ur, 
I say to you, good men, how ye him shall find, 

A sign and token, through this wonder. 
To your burgh fare hence, ye find, so as I to you said, 

A child, new bom, in a crib lying.' 
Then came, while he to them spake, of angels a host, 

A heavenly retinue, thus all singing : 

* In the heavenly kingdom's highth be to God glory ; 

Be on earth peace also to all who are full of Gk)d'B vilL' 

§ 40. Mu&piUi. — This is generally treated as High 
rather than Low German, the Saxon being Low^ and 
Tatian intermediate or transitional. With Otfrid the 
High German characteristics increase ; and the next 
extract will be more High German stilL 


Daz h6rt ih rahhon They have heard I relate 

Dia werolt-rehtwison ; Tho world-wise, 



Bai senli der Antidiriflto 
Mit Eliasd pAgea. 
Ber wazch iat kiwAfinit , 
Benne wixdit untar in 
Wik arhapaa ; 
Khensnn sind so kreftec ; 
Din kosa ist so mibhil. 
Elias Btzitit 
Ft den enigon lip ; 
Will den rehtkemon 
DiBi lihhi kistarkan : 
Pidin seal imo halfui 
Der himiles kiwaltit. 
Per Antichristo rtAt 
8t^ pt demo Satanaee ; 
Der inan Danenkan seal; 
Pidin seal er in der wicsteti 
Wnnt piTttllan ; 
Enti in demo sinde 
Sigalos werdan. 

That shonld the Antichrist 

"With Elias straggle. 

The traitor is armed ; 

Then becomes between them 

War raised. 

The champions are so strong, 

The case is so great 

Elias strives 

For the everlasting life. 

Will for the right-doing 

The kingdom strengthen ; 

Therein shall him help 

Who roles heaven, 

The Antichrist stands 

By the old Fiend ; 

Stands by Satanas ; 

Who shall sink (to, or, before?) him. 

Both shall in fight 

Wounded full. 

And on that occasion 

Be without victoiy. 

§ 41. Teb WsisssifBBUif Htxn. 

Dat chifrogin ih mit firahim 

Firinuizzo meista ; 

Dat ero ni noas, noh nfhimil, 

Noh panm noh pereg nl anas, 

Ki (sterro) noh heinig, 

Noh snnna noh scein. 

Noh mana ni linhta; 

Noh der mareo seo, 

Do dar ni wiht ni was, 

Ente ni nuenteo, 

Enti do nnas der eino ; 

Almahtico cot 

Manno miltisto. 

Enti dar nnaron auh 

Manahe mit inan, 

Cootiihha geista ; 

Enti cot heilac, 

Cot almahtico, 

Du himil enti erda chiworahtos, 

Enti tn mannnn 

That have I heard among men. 

Of the fore-wise most, 

That erst neither was, nor heaven 

Nor tree, nor berg. 

Nor [star] nor . . . 

Nor sun shone. 

Nor moon gave light, 

Nor the great sea ; 

For there no wiht was, 

Being or monster. 

And then was the only 

Almighty GFod, 

Of men the mildest. 

And there were also 

Many with him, 

Gx)dlike Spirits ; 

[And] Gtod Holy 

God Almighty ; 

Thou heaven and earth wroughtest, 

And thou for men 


So manac coot forchipi ; So mnch good hast created. 

Forgip mer, in dino ganada, Grant me in thy grace, 

Behta galaupa, Eight belief, 

Enti cotan uuiUeon, And good will, 

Uuisdom enti spahida, Wisdom and speed, 

Enti craft tiuflun [And] craft the devil 

Za uuidarstantanne To withstand 

Enti arc za piuisanne And evil to conquer 

Enti dinan inillain And thy will 

Za chiunarchanne. To work. 

§ 42. High and Low Oerman. — A difference be- 
tween these important terms is here foreshadowed. 

By F, D, TH{bs in there), and are called the Sonaid 
Mutes ; P, F, T, TH (as in then), and K the Surd. 

The former prevail in the Old Saxon. 

In Taticm the Surds begin to take their place — 
compare Truhtvn^JjOT^, with Drohtm in the HelicmoL 

In HUdebrand and Hathubrath there is a mixture. 

In Otfrid the proportion of Surds increases. 

In MuapiUi and the Weisaenbrun Hyrwa, they 
predominate — pidi/ii for beide, and ki/wdfinit^gewaff' 
nedy in Muspilli ; chifregvri^gefragen in the Hymn. 

The same applies to the th in Heliand, which be- 
comes d in the Hymn ; and to ^ in the Heliand, which 
becomes z (ta) in Otfrid, &c., and 88 in modem German. 
Compare water, better, &c., in English with vjoaeer, 
besser, &c., in German. For more upon this point, see 
Chapter XVL 





§ 43. The Frisian Diaiecta. — We return to the 
parts about Munster and follow the line of dialects in 
a different direction, i.e. northwards ; or, rather, north 
by west. 

A line drawn from Munster to Leeuwarden takes 
us into a new district ; one wherein the difference of 
dialect either simulates or amounts to a difference of 
language. This is the case with, what is at present, 
the Dutch province of Friesland, where the language, 
in equal contrast with the Dutch of Holland and the 
Piatt Deutsch dialects of Germany, of the old Frisians 
is still spoken. The area, however, of the old Frisian 
was much wider than it is now. Upon this, more 
will be said in the sequel. 

§ 44. Neither the northern nor the southern boun- 
dary of the Frisian area is of much consequence. We 
know the philological frontier in each case. And the 
exact geographical points at which the languages touch 
one another is a matter of minor importance. On the 
south the Frisian of Friesland originally extended 
beyond its present boundaries, and indented both the 
Saxon and the (Salian) Frank frontiers in Gxielderland, 
Brabant, and Flanders. On the north it reached the 
Danish frontier. Whether the Elbe was the boundary 
we need not enquire. It is only necessary to know that 
the continuous contact was along the coast line. 

The northern and southern boundaries of the Frisian 
are, as aforesaid, of minor importance. What we most 
require to know is the extent to which the Frisian forms 


of speech ran eaatwBxd, i.e. inland, and in the direction 
of Hanover. The leading fact on this point is that 
the town of Meppen was Saxon. 

Meppen is on the Ems ; in Grermany, and not in the 
Netherlands (Holland). Yet it is near the frontier. It 
is also near the frontier of the present Frisian language 
on the south-east — that being the direction in which 
it extends the farthest inland. Along the coast it has 
been superseded by the Piatt Deutsch of Oldenburg and 
Hanover ; though it is preserved in the islands &om 
Texel to Sylt. Then it reappears on the coast of Sles- 
wick, between the towns of Husum and Bredsted. That 
it was the language of East Friesland is implied by the 
name. A fragment for the district of Saterland carries 
its area a little more eastwards. The general cha- 
racter of the Frisian was that it followed the coast 
Nowhere, however, except in the south-east, did it 
stretch far inland. For the parts about Guxhav^ be- 
tween the mouths of the Elbe and the Weser, it has not 
been traced at all. 

§ 45. The Saxonia of Foeta Saxo. — ^This limita- 
tion of the Frisian area on the south and east makes 
the fourth district which we have to consider one of 
inordinate magnitude. But it is one of great import- 
ance in other respects, because it is in the parts 
between Westphalia and the Elbe that we must look 
for the Angle districts. And here a well-known notice 
of the ancient Saxonia^ with its boimdaries and divi- 
sions, helps us, if not to any new fact, at least to a 
convenient arrangement of its actual and possible 
dialects. The work, in Latin hexameters, is referred 
to the reign of Charlemagne, and (as the author is 
unknown) is quoted as ^Poeta SaaoJ* He does not 
include Friesland in his Saxonia, and he does not take 
his Saxonia further south than Westphalia. His two 


great geographical landmarks are the Elbe and the 
parts about the present town of Engem^ in which the 
older name Angrarii or Angraria is preserved ; itself 
being an abbreviation of the Angrivarii of Tacitus. 
This Angraria is a district rather than a town, and a dis- 
trict of a peculiar line. Long and narrow, it reaches, on 
each side of the Weser, from tha parts about Paderbom 
to the North Sea, dividing the two great blocks of land 
which constitute very nearly the western and eastern 
halves of Saxonia. The first of these is, as we expect, 
Weetphsli&j a name that has come down to us ; the 
second is J^o^^halia, a name which has become obsolete. 
Then there is an outlying division beyond the Elbe, 
named, according to its -situation, Nordalbingian, The 
boundary of Saxony on the east is also the boundary of 
Germany ;■ for the country beyond the Elbe and Saale, 
whatever it may have been in the time of Tacitus, was, 
in the eighth century, Slavonic ; and even so late as the 
kst century there were (in Liineburg) some Slavonians 
on the left or German side of the Elbe. 


Geneialis luibet populos diyisio ternos ; 

Insignita quibus Saxonia floruit olim. 

Nomina nunc remanent ; yirtus antiqua rooessit. 

Denique Wcatphalos vocitant in parte manentes 

Occidua : quorum non longe terminus amne 

A Ehcno distat ; regionem solis ad ortum 

Inhabitant Osterlcitdi, quos nomine quidam 

Oiiphalos ulii rociUint, ct)nfinia quorum 

Infestant coiguncta suis gens perflda Sclavi. 

Inter prodictos media regiono morantur 

Angrarii, populus Saxonum tcrtius : horum 

Putria Francorum torris sociatur ab Austro, 

Ooeanoquo eadem coigungitur ex Aquilone. 
» » » » » 

Saxonum popalus quidam quos cl^iudit ab Austro 

Albis, sejunctim positos Aqnilonis ad oxem : 

Ho6 NordalbingoB patrio Mrmone vocamus. 


The political boundaiy of Saxony south of West- 
phalia we may cany in the direction of the Shine as 
far as the Rohr, and along the Weser as £Bur as the 
northern frontier of Hesse ; and with this the philo- 
logical frontier seems to have been, at leasts co- 

§ 46. The Frisian. — Of this division much is known; 
for we have numerous specimens of almost every one of 
its present dialects and subdialects, from Sleswick to 
Holland ; i.e. for almost every one of the little islands off 
the coasts of East and West Friesland, and Oldenburg; 
for Heligoland ; for the more northern islands of Sylt, 
Amrom, &c. ; for the North Frisian of the parts on the 
mainland of Sleswick ; for the fragmentary Saterland 
dialect in East Friesland ; and, along with all this, 
something like a provincial literature of the Frisian of 
the Dutch Province of Friesland. 

Besides this we have Frisian compositions for three 
different stages : the Old Frisian, the Middle Frisian, 
and New Frisian ; so that, if there be any error con- 
nected with the philology and ethnology of Friesland, 
it is not for want of materials. 

Indeed, a slight amount of error may arise from the 
very abimdance of them : and it is possible that such 
may be the case here. As compared with the Frisian 
division of Northern (or Low) Grermany, the Oatphor 
lian (with which the Angrarian may be connected) is, 
in the way of data, a blank. It has no compositions 
whatever like the Westphalian Heliand, or the Essen 
and Frekkenhorst muniments; compositions undoubt- 
edly belonging to the district ; and of the same age and 
stage as corresponding compositions in England. 

The bearing of this upon the Frisian is evident. 
As a matter of fact there is, from the first, a difference 
between the northern and southern forms of the 


GermaiL (Angle or Saxon as vTd may choose to call it) 
from which the English language is derived : and, as a 
matter of &ct, it is the southern that is the most espe- 
cially Old Saxon. We expect this a priori, and we 
find it ; for the Saxon of Westphalia itself is, as com- 
pared with the Frisian, a southern form of speech : so 
that the actual alBbiity coincides with the geographical 

In the same way, the Frisian, as a language of 
North Q-ermany, and, also, as a language of the parts 
of the Continent that lie opposite to the northern coun- 
ties of England, is the one to which we naturally look 
when the diflFerence between the Westsaxon and North- 
n Tnhrifl.Ti of England has to be explained by reference to 
the particular districts of G-ermany in which the latter 
originated. We know that the Westsaxon is more espe- 
cially Old Saxon and vice versa ; and, this being the case, 
the doctrine that the Northimibrian is more especially 
Frisian presents itself: a doctrine which, in the main, 
is true. It is clear, however, that in this respect the 
Frisian forms of speech are invested with an impor- 
tance not wholly their own, inasmuch as there is no- 
thing that represents the Grerman of Oaiphalia. 

Nevertheless, the structure and distribution of the 
Frisian forms of speech are almost as important as 
those of the Saxon. Its leading characteristics are : 

(1) the avoidance of the sound of -n at the end of 
words, as Frisian tung-a, A. S. tung^am, ; 0. S. tung-on, 
tonguea; Frisian 6cpr?i^-a, Saxon b(Bm-an=(to) bum; 

(2) its preference of the sound of -r to that of -«. 

§ 47. It is in their oldest stages, respectively, 
that the two forms of speech are best compared. For 
fuller details, see Bask, Fri&isk Sproglcere, 1825. 


Transition of Letters, 

d in Frisian corresponds to ed in A. S. ; as cUidt rid, Ids, strdm, bdm, 
cdpj dre, hap, Frisian ; dedd, redd, leds, stredm, bedm, cedp, edre, 
hedp, Saxon ; dead, red, loose, stream, tree (boom), bargain (cheap, 
chapman), ear, heap, English. 

i in Frisian corresponds to (1), the A. S. <i; as eth,tiken, Ml,Md, 
Fris. ; df>, tdcen, hdl, brdd, Saxon ; oath, token, hale, broad, Eng- 
lish ; — (2), to A. S. <b; hh, dSde, brSda, Frisian; Fris. har, dad, 
brcedan, A. S. ; hair, deed, roast, English. 

etQca and (b A. S. — Frisian, thet, A. S. )><Bt, Engl, that, Fris. gere, 
A. S. gars, Engl, grass. — Also to eo ; prestere, Fr., preost, A. 8., 
priest, Engl. ; berch, Fr., beorh, A. S., hiU {berg, as in iceberg, 
Engl.) ; melok, Fr., meoloc, A. S., milk, Engl. 

t to eo A. S. — Fr., irthe, A. S. eor^ ; Fris. hirte, A. S. heorte; "Ens. fir, 
A. S.feor; = in English, earth, heart, far, 

jd = €0 A. S. ; as bjdda, beddan, bid — thet fjdrde, feor^, the fouHk—' 
sjdk, aedc, sick. 

ju^eo A. S.; rjucht, ryth, right— frjund,f reond, friend, 

dz = ; Fr. sedea, lidzja ; A. S. secgan, licgan ; Engl, to say, 
to lie. 

tff, ts, sff, sth^k, S. c or ce ; as seereke, or sthereke, Frisian, cgriee, 
A. S., church, Engl. ; ccetel, Fr., cytel, A. S., ketUe, Engl. 

eh Fr. = A A. S., as thjach, Fr. >eoA, A. S., ^A^A, EngL ; bereh, bedrh, 
hiU (berg) ; dochtor, dohtor, daughter, &c 

§ 48. 

Declension of Substantives, 


Substantives ending in a Vowel, 

Masculine. Feminine, Neuter, 

Sing, Nom. Campa (a champion) Tunge {a tongue), 'Are (on ear). 

Ace. Campa Tunga 'Are. 

Dat. Campa Tnnga 'Ara. 

Gen. Campa Tunga 'Ara. 

Plur, Hom. Ciimpa Tunga 'Ara. 

Ace. Campa Tunga 'Ara. 

Dat, Campon Tungon Aion. 

Gen, Campona Tungnna 'Azona. 

tsascrms in fbisiak. 



Subaianiivee ending m a Coiuonant, 

Feminine, Neuter, 

Skiff, Nam. Hond (a hand) Skip (a ship), 

Aeo, Hond Skip. 

Dot, Hond Skipe. 

Gen. Hondo Skipis. 

Plmr, ^^>m. Honda Skipu. 

Aoc, Honda Skipn. 

Dot, Hondum (-on) Skipnm. 

Oen. Honda Skipa. 

With respect to the masculine substantives ter- 
minating in a consonant, it must be observed that in 
Anglo-Saxon there are two modes of declension. In 
one, the plural ends in -8 ; in the other in -a. From 
the former the Frisian differs ; with the second it has 
a close alliance ; e. g.i — 



Sing, Nom. Sunn (a eon) 


Ace, Sunn 


Dot, Sana 


Gen, Sana 


Plur, Nom, Sana 


Ace, Sana 


Dat. Sonam 


Gen, Sonena 


Decleneian of Aoffeetipee, 






Sing. Nom, G6d 



Ace. G6dene 



Dat, G6da(-um) 


G6da (-am). 

Gen, G6de8 



Plur. Nom, G6de 



Aec, Gode 



Dat, G6dnm(-a) 

Q6dxaa (-a) 

G6dam (-a). 

Gen, G6dcra 










Sing. Nbm. G6da 



Jco, a6da 



Dot. G6da 



Gm. a6da 



Bur. Nom, GhSda 



Aoo. G^da 



Bat. G6da(-on) 

G6da (-on) 

G6da (-on). 

Om. G6da(-oiia) 

G6da (-ona) 

G6da (-ona). 

In reapect to the Pronouns, there is in the Old 
Frisian of Dutch Friesland no dual number (the North 
Frisian has one), as there is in Anglo-Saxon. On the 
other hand, however, the Frisians (whilst they have no 
such form as hia) possess, like the Icelandic, the in- 
flected adjectival pronoun sm^ corresponding to the 
Latin auua : whilst, like the Anglo-Saxons, and unlike 
the Icelanders, they have nothing to correspond with 
the Latin se. 

In Frisian there is between the demonstrative pro- 
noun used as an article, and the same word used as a 
demonstrative in the limited sense of the term, the 
following diflTerence of declension : — 






Nam. 7%i 



Ace. Thene 



Dot. Thk 



Oen. Thes 













The Dmonairatm t» the UmUei JSense of the Word. 




Sin^. Norn, Thi 



Jcc, Thene 



Dot. Tham 



Qen. Thes 



In the inflection of the verbs there is between the 
Frisian and A. S. this important difference. In A. S. 
the infinitive ends in -an, as madany to make, IcBran, 
to learn, bcBman, to bum ; whilst in Frisian it ends in 
-a, as moAro, lira, bema. 

Sing. 1. Berne I bum. 

2. Bemst 7%ou bumett, 

3. Bemth He bums. 
Plur. 1. Bemath We bum. 

2. Bemath Ye bum. 

3. Bemath I%ey bum. 

The Auxiliary Verbs. 

Present Past. 

Sinff. 1. Ik ben 1. Ik 

2. ? 2. ThA l-Was. 

3. Hi is 3 

.Ik ^ 
i. ThA [ 
1. Hi J 

1. VTi \ 

2. I [Weron. 

3. Hja I 

Plur. 1. Wi ' 

2. I Lsend 

3. Hja 

Present. Past. 

Sing. 1. 2. 3. 8e 1. 2. 3. W^. 

Plur. 1. 2. 3. Se 1. 2. 3. W&w. 
Injin. Wesa. Pr. Part. Wesande. Past Part. E-wesen. 

• * 

§ 49. Old Frisian Laws. 

Asega-hog,'^ i. 3. pp. 13, 14. {Ed. Wtarda.) 

Thet is thiu thredde liodkest and thes Kynig Kerles ieft, theter 
allera monna ek ana sina ejna gode besitte umberavat. Hit ne se thet 
ma hine urwinne mith tele and mith rethe and mith riuchta thingate. 

— — - — - I I ■ _ ^1 

• Abo PJural. f Date, A.D. 1212-1260 : Parts, about \]bib }^\i<\^. 


Sa hebbere alsftm sin Asega dema and dele to lioda londriuchte. 
Ther ne hach nen Asega nenne dom to delande hit ne se thet hi to f&rsk 
tha Kejsere fon Kume esweren hebbe and thet hi fon da liodon ekeren 
80. Sa hoch hi thenne to demande and to delande tha fiande alsare 
£rionnde, thruch des ethes willa, ther hi to fara tha Keysere fon Ktune 
esweren heth, tho demande and to delande widuon and weson, walnberon 
and alle werlosa liodon, like to helpande and sine thred knilinge. Alsa 
thi Asega nimth tha unriuchta mida and tha urlouada panninga, and 
ma hini urtinga mi mith twam sine juenethon an thes Kyninges bonne, 
sa ne hoch hi nenne dom miLr to delande, trnch thet thi Asega thi 
biteknath thene prestere, hwande hia send siande and hia skilon wesa 
agon there heliga Eerstenede, hia skilun helpa alle • tham ther hiam 
seluon nauwet helpa ne muge. 

The samet in English, 

That is the third determination and concession of King Charles, 
that of all men each one possess his own goods (house ?) unrobbed. It 
may not be that any man overcome him with charge (tales), and with 
summons (rede), and with legal action. So let him hold as his Asega 
(judge) dooms and deals according to the land-right of the people. 
There shall no Asega deal a doom unless it be that before the Caesar of 
Home he shall have sworn, and that he shall have been by the people 
chosen. He has then to doom and deal to foes as to friends, through 
the force (will) of the oath which he before the Csesar of Eome has 
sworn, to doom and to deal to widows and orphans, to wayfarers and 
all defenceless people, to help them as his own kind in the third 
degree. If the Asega take an illegal rewsupd, or pledged money, and a 
man convict him before two of his colleagues in the King's Court, he 
has no more to doom, since it is the Asega that betokens the priest, 
and they are seeing, and they should be the eyes of the Holy Chris- 
tendom, they should help all those who may nought help themselves. 

Ldter Form. 

Friesche Volks-Almanak, pp. 84, 85. {Bosworthy p. Ixvi.) 

Dat oder landriucht is, hweerso dyo moder her kyndes eerwe 
foerkapet, jefta foerwizled mit har fryonda reed eer dat kind jerig is ; 
als hit jerich se, likje him di caep, so halde hitt, ende likje him naet, 
so fare hit oen syn ayn eerwe sonder stryd ende sonder schulde. 

So hwaso dat kind biflucht jefte birawet op syn ayn eerwe, so breckt 
hy tyen lyoedmerck ende to jens dine frane (?) dat sint XXI schillin- 
gen : ende alle da lyoed agen him to helpen ende di frana, dat hg 
comme op syn ayn eerwe, deer hi eer bi riuchta aechte : hi ne se dat 
hio et seld habbe jef seth, jef wixled truch dera tria haudneda een. 


deer hio die kjndes dee lires mede hulp. Dyo furme need is : hweerso 
een kynd jong is finaen ende fitered noerd oer hef, jefta suther wr birgh, 
8oe moet dio moder her kyndes eerwe setta ende sella ende her kynd 
lesa ende des lives bihelpa. Dyo oder need is : jef da jere diore wirdet 
ende di heta honger wr dat land faert, ende dat kynd honger stera wil, 
so moet dio moder her kyndes eerwe setta ende sella ende capia har 
bem kn ende ey ende coem, deerma da kynde des lives mode helpe. 
Byo tredde need is : als dat kynd is al stocknaken jefta huusleas ende 
dan di tiuestere nevil ende calda winter oencomt, so faert aller manick 
oen syn hof ende oen syn huos ende an waranne gaten, ende da wylda 
dier seket dyn holla beam ende der birgha hly, aldeer hit syn lyf oen 
bihalda mey : sa weynet ende scryt dat onjeriga kynd ende wyst dan 
syn nakena lyae ende syn hnusleas ende syn fader deer him reda schuld 
to jenst dyn honger ende winter nevil cald dat hi so diepe ende dimme 
mitta flower neylen is onder eke ende onder da eerda bisloten, ende 
bitacht ; so moet dio moder her kyndes eerwe setta ende sella, om dat 
hio da bihield habbe ende biwaer also lang so hit oi\jerick is, dat hit 
oen forsto ner oen hoenger naet forfare. 

In English, 

The other landright is : whenever the mother sells the inheritance 
of her child, or exchanges (it) with rede (connsel) of her friends before 
the child is of age ; when he is of age, likes he the bargain, let him 
hold it, and does he not like it, let him faie (enter) on his own inheri- 
tance without strife and without debts. 

Whoever fights or bereaves the child on his own ground, he forfeits 
ten ledemarks, and to the king's attorney the mulct is XXI schillings ; 
and all the lede (people) ought to help him and the king's attorney that 
he may come to his own inheritance, which he owned before by right : 
unless she has sold, or set (pawned) or exchanged it through one of 
the three hoadneeds (necessities) by which is helped the life of the 
child. The first need is: whenever a child is made prisoner and 
fettered northward over the sea, or southward over the mountains, the 
mother must set (pawn) and sell her child's inheritance and release her 
child and save its life. The other need is : if the years become dear, 
and sharp hunger goes over the land, and the child will starve of 
hunger, then the mother must set and sell her child's inheritance, and 
buy her child's cows and ewes, and com, wherewith the life of the 
child is helped. The third need is : when the child is stark-naked, or 
houseless, and then the dark fog and the cold winter come on, when 
every man fares (enters) his house and its appurtenances, and lurking- 
holes, and the wild deer (beasts) seek the hollow beam (tree) and the 
lee of the mountains, where it may save its life : then moans and weeps 
the minor child, and shows his naked limbs, and his being houseless, 
and (points at) hii father, who should provide for him against hunger 


and the wintiy fog-cold, that he bo deep and dim is locked np and 
covered under the earth with fonr nails : so the mother must set and 
sell her child's inheritance, since she has the keeping and guarding as 
long as (the child) is under age, that it dies not ftom firost ot from 

§ 50. Without determining too nicely at what exact 
time the Old Frisian stage ceases, we may take the 
middle of the seventeenth century {say a.d. 1650) as 
date for the fullest development of the Middle. 

i» !.♦ 

Swiet, ja swiet is 't, oere miete Sweet, yes sweet is over measure 

*t boaskien foar 'e jonge lie ; The marrying for the young people. 

Kreftich swiet is % sizz* ik jiette. Most sweet is it, I say yet, 

As it giet mei Alders rie. When it goes with the elders' rede. 

Mar oars tiget 'et to'n pleach. But otherwise it tends to a plague, 

As ik oan myn geafeynt seach. As I on my village saw. 

2. 2. 

* Goune Swobke, lit uws pearje,' ' Golden Swobke, let us pair,' 

Bea hy har mei mylde stemm. He bade her with a mild voice. 

'OfkOf'seise, 'hoscoeldtkleaije! * Ofke,' she said, 'How should I 

clear it ! 

Wist du ! rie to heite in mem ? ' Wist thou ! rede father and mother? ' 

' Ljeaf ! dat nim ik to myn laest.' ' Love I I take this to my last.' 

Dear mei wier de kn6te £iest. Therewith was the knot fast. 

8. 8. 

Da dit pear togear scoe ite, When this pair together should eat. 

In hja hiene nin gewin, And they had no gain, 

Heite seach, as woe hy bite. Father saw as if he would bite, 

Mem wier stjoersch in lef fen sin. Mother was stem and cross of 


' Ofke,* sei se, ' elk jier in bem. * Ofke,' she said, * each year a child. 

Wier ik f4em ! ik woe 't so jem.* Were I maid I I would I were.' 

4. 4. 

Hoite in Hoatske Sneins to keamer Hoite and Hoatske every Sunday 

in the inn 
Mekken it mei elkoarme klear. Made it clear with each other. 
Tetke krigge Sjolle kreamer, Tetke got SjoUe the pedlar 

♦ From the Trefeuce to Dr. Bosworth's Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, 
where the whole snliject is fhlly treated. Pp. 


To Sint Eal by wyn in bjear. To St. Alof s by wine and beer. 

Kn rint elk om as in elet, Now each nina abont as a slut^ 

Inbekleyet; mar to let And complains ; bat too late. 

5. 5. 

Oeds die better, nei ik achtje, Oeds did better as I heed, 

Da by Saets syn troa tosei : When he said to Saets his troth : 

Hy list de alders even plach^e, He let the elders even plight, 

Hwet se oan elk ich joene mei. What they on each (edge) ride gave. 

Ku berit hy hnws in schuwr^, Now he possesses house and bam. 

In syn bem fleane all' man awr. And his children outdo all men. 

6. 6. 

Ork, myn Soan, wolt du bedye, Ork, my Son, wouldst thou thrive, 

Rin naet oan allyk ien moll' ! Bun not on, all like a mole ; 

Jeld in rie lit mei dy frye. Let age and rede woo with thee, 

Bern, so gean' dyn saken woL Child, then go thy affiurs well ; 

Den scil de himel uwr dyn dwaen Then the heaven shall over thy 


Lok in mylde seining^ jaen. Luck and mild blessings grant. 

The chief classics of the Middle Frisian literature 
are Gysbert (Gilbert) Japicz, from whom the preceding 
specimen is taken, and Althuisen. 

§ 51. Of the Frisian, as it is spoken at the present 
time in the Dutch province of West Friesland, the fol- 
lowing is a specimen. 

Ann nr Frsb.'*^ 

Am. — ^Ho djon binne de mieren, Fetse? Ik haw jister net nei 
sted wsest. 

FvTBB. — 11 wit net ; sa hwat by de daelder om, eak ien kromke er 

Abb. — Wieme er al iju ? 

Fetsb. — Ja, dsBT stiene al hele keppels. It liket dat se rom binne, 
mar it wier myn soarte net. 

Abb. — Heste den dyn feste mieren jiers? Hawwe se Ijar eigen 
kost, jimmo mieren ? 

Fktsx. — Hwet mienste ? dat ik my de earen fen 'e kop f^tte litte 
wol ? Ik haw simmers genoach oan twa uwthongere Wald^u, dy 't 1l 
by my yn de ongetiid ha*. 

* From the ScMeerunnJM fin JouU-B^iee, pp. l^.—IHmter («. «. 
Dewnter)^ 1835. 


Abe. — Jane jimme se den jouns eak neat? 

Fbtse. — Ja, den krye se sa hwat ein heal kroadfol suwpenbry, in 
dat behimmelje se eak suwkerswiet. Ik wit net wser se it berc^je yn 
hjar smelle pansen. fija binne vis oars fen binnen as ien Fries. 

Abb. — £i, kom ju ! It binne ommers eak minscen as wj. 

The samst in the Dutch of Holland, 

Abb. — Hoe duur zyn de mieren Fetse ? ik ben gisteren niet naar de 
stad geweest. 

FETSB.~Ik we«t het niet ; ongeveer een daalder en ook een kroim^e 
er over. 

Abb. — Waren er veel. 

Fetsb.— Ja, er waren al heele hoopen. Het schynt dat ze roim 
zyn ; maar het waren geen yan myn soort. 

Abb. — ^Hebt gy dan nwe vaste mieren jaarlyks? Hebben uwe 
mieren hunne eigen kost ? 

Fbtsb. — Wat bedoelt gy ? dat ik my de ooren van het hoofd zal 
laten eten? ik heb in den zomer genoeg aan twee uitgehongerde 
Wondlieden welke ik by my heb in de hoojing. 

Abe. — Geeft gy ze dan 'savonds ook niets. 

Fetse. — Ja, dan krygen ze ongeveer een geheele kruiwagen vol 
karnemelk, en dat eten ze ook zuikerzoet op. Ik weet niet waar ze het 
beigen in hunne kleine darmen. Ze zyn zeker inwendig verschillend 
van een Fries. 

Abe. — Och kom reis ! het zyn immers ook menschen als wy. 

In English, 

Abe. — ^How dear are (what is the price of) the mowers, Fetse? I 
was not in the town yesterday. 

Fbtsb. — I wot not ; about a dollar a man and a bit (crujnb) over. 

Abe. — ^Were there plenty of them ? 

Fetse. — ^Yes, there stood whole heaps. It seemed as if there were 
enough of them ; but it is not my sort. 

Abb. — Hast thou then your mowers regular (fast) by the year ? 
Do they keep themselves (have they their own cost) your mowers ? 

Fetse. — What meanest thou ? That I should let my ears be eaten 
off my head ? I had enough in summer, with two starved woodland- 
men, that I had with me at the hay-time. 

Abb. — Did you not then give them anything in the afternoon ? 

Fetse. — ^Yes ! Then they must have (crave) about a whole bucketfull 
of porridge (soup and barley) ; and that must be as sweet as sugar. 
I wot not where they bury it in their small paunches. They must 
3rwiss (certainly) be of a different sort in their insides from a Fries. 

Abb. — Gome now I They are still men like ourselves (as we). 


It Ewangedje fen Matthhoees, 

1. Bo nou JefliiB beme wier to Sethlehem yn Judea yn kening 
Hezodes dagen, hen, binne dser wizen fen iastezadelen to Jerusalem 
oankomd, sizzende. 

2. ' Hwsere is di kening fen di Jenden, di beme is ? ' * Wy hawwe 
ommers syn ste4rre yn it fasten sjoen ind binne komd om him to 

3. Di kening Herodes nou, as hy dit hedrde, waerd ^ang ind hiel 
Jeroaalem mei him. 

4. Ind di haedprftsters ind di scroftgeUarden by ieno4r bringende 
firiagge hy l\jar, hwer di Christns beme wiide moast? 

6. Qja noa seinen tsjin him. ' To Bethlehem yn Judea ; want sa 
is scrtenn throch di profeet.' 

6. ' Ind don, Bethlehem Un * fen Juda ; dou biste lang di minste 
naet onder di prinsen fen Juda ; want uwt dy sdl di lieder fo4rtkomme, 
dy myn folk wei^je sciL' 

7. Bo hat Herodes di wizen stilkes roppen, ind hi fr^gge hjar 
wakker nei di tiid, do di steArre opd^e wier. 

8. Bserop hjar nei Bethlehem stjoerende sei hy, * Beisgje hinne ind 
fomim flitich nei dat bemke, ind as jimme it foun' hawwe s^oer my 
tynge, dat ik eak kom ind it hildje/ 

9. ^ja den di kening hedrd hawwende binne fo&rttein ; ind hen, di 
flta&rre dy 't hja yn it ^ten sjoen hiene, gong fo4r Igar uwt, ont l\ja 
kaem ind sto^' boppe it plak, dsr it bemke wier. 

10. Bo hja nou di ste&rre s^en forhnwggen Iga mei wakkergr^te 

11. Ind yn it huws kommende s^en l\]a it boike mei Maria syn 
mem, ind knibbe^jende habbe hja it hilde. 

12. Ind h^SiX kastkes opdwaende brochten 1^'a him jeften, goald ind 
wierk ind myrre. Ind yn di droage throch goadlike ynjouwinge for- 
mo4nne, dat hja naet nei Herodes to bek g^n moasten forsidden hja 
Uns ien oare wei wer nei hjar lAn ta. 

The same in Dutch, 

1. Toen nu Jezus geboren was te Beth-lehem, gdegm in Judea, in 
de dagen Tan den Koning Herodes, ziet ! eenige W\]zen van het Oosten 
zijn te Jemzalem aangekomen. 

2. Zeggende: waer is de geboren Koning de Joden? want wij 
hebben zijne ster in het Oosten gezien en zijn gekomen, om hem te 

8. Be Eonig Herodes nu, dit gehoord hebbende, werd ontroerd en 
geheel Jeruzalem met hem ; 

4. £n bijeenveigaderd hebbende al de Overpriestezs en Schriftge- 
leerden des yolks, vraagde van hen, waar de Christus Zon geboren 


5. En zg zeiden tot hem te Beth-lehem, in Jndea gdegen; want 
alzoo is geschreyen door den Profeet : 

6. ' En gij Beth-lehem, g\j land van Jnda I z^t geenozine de minBte 
onder de borsten van Jnda ; want nit u zal de Leideman voortkomeo, 
die m\jn volk Israel weiden zaL' 

7. Toen heeft Herodes de Wijzen heimel\]k geroepen, en yernam 
naarstiglijk van hen den tijd, wanneer de ster yerschenen was ; 

8. En hen naer Beth-lehem zendende, zeide h\j : * reist heen en 
onderzoek naarstiglijk naar het kindeken, en hols gg het zult geyon- 
dea hebben, boodschapt het mi^j, opdat ik ook kome en hetzelye 
aanbidde ! ' 

9. En zg, den Koning gehoord heboende, zgn heengeieisd. En, 
zietl de ster, die zg in het Oosten gezien hadden, ging hnn yoor, tot 
dat z\j kwam en stond boven de plaats, waar het kindeken whs. 

10. Als zij nu de ster zagen, yerhengden zg zich met zeer groota 

11. En in het hnis gekomen zijnde» vonden zg het kindeken met 
Maria, zijne moeder; en nedervallende hebben zg hetzelye aangebeden ; 
en hnnne schatten opengedaan hebbende, bragten zij hem geschenken, 
goad, en wierook en mirre. 

12. En door Goddelgke openbaring yermaand zgnde in den dioom, 
dat zg niet zonden wederkeeren tot Herodes, vertrokken raj door eenen 
anderen weg weder naar hun land. 

§ 52. North Frisian, — ^The following is from 
Camerer, and, next to the short sample by which it is 
followed, and a few others, it is the oldest specimen 
of North Frisian. 

Song for a Wedding. 

1. 1. 

We sen hjir to en brullep, We are here to a wedding, 

Bjir mut we nk wat sjnng ; Here must we eke somewhat sing ; 

Up sok gordt frengeddaogen, Upon such a made (gati) holiday, 

Da mut et lustig gang. There must it merry go. 

Hoera! Hoera! Hoera! Hurrah! Hurrah! Hurrah! 

Da mut et lustig gung. There must it merry go. 

2. 2. 

Bi 't 8Jungen hjerd to drinken. By singing belongs drinking, 

Ark heed biid' slunk en smack, Each head becomes sleek and smog, 

En bjir es wat 6jer keulked ! In here is what 

Dit es en foarskel saok. This is a capital afbir. 

Hoera ! enz. Hurrah, &c 


3. d. 

We nem da bi uhb glesen, We nim {take) then by our glasseB, 

En leet nne hoi' gefaol And let ns heartily 

Bogt dugtig iens to drinlten Eight well at once drink 

Una Brid en Bridmana akaoL Onr bride and bridegroom's health. 

Hoera! ens. Hurrah, &c. 

In 1452, the following inscription was found on a 
font at Biisom. 

The Original 

Disse hirren dope de baye wi thou ewigen onthonken mage lete, da 
■cboUen osse benne in kreesent warde. 

Thmelaiian hy Clemens into the present Frieian qf Amrom. 

Thas hirr dip di ha wi ton ewagen unthonken mage leat, thear skell 
ill biamer nn krasient wurd. 


This here dip have we as an everlasting remembrance let make, 
there shall onr bairns in christened be. 

The Wooer from HoUtein. 

IKar Kam en skep bi Sudher Sjoe There came a ship by the Sonth Sea, 

He, tri jnng firners on di flot. With three yonng wooers on the 


Hokken wiar di fordeorst ? Who was the first ? 

Dit wiar Peter Bothgmn. That was Peter Kothgmn. 

Hnd saat hi sih spooren ? Where set he his trades ? 

Fnar Hennerk Jerken's dtiiir? For Hennerk Jerken's door. 

Hokken kam to duur ? Who came to door ? 

Marrike sallef. Mary-kin herself, 

Me krnk en bekker on di jen Crock and beaker in one hand, 


£In gnlde ring aur di ndher handh. A gold ring on the other hand. 

Ju noodhight hem en sin hinghst She pressed him and his horse in. 


Bod di hingst haaver nnd Peter Gave the horse oats and Peter wine. 


Toonkh Gott fhar des gnd dei. Thank God for this good day ! 

Al di brid end bridmaaner of wei, All brides and bridesmen out of way ! 

Batolter Marri en Peter alliining ! Except Mary and Peter alone. 

Jn look hom nn to kest She locked him np in her box, 

£d wildh hom nimmer mnar meet. And never would miss him more. 


The Wedding-Btonea of Eidum.* 


En Faamel oon Eidum hsei her forlaavet, mod en jungen Moan, en 
hem taasTsret, dat's ier taa en Stain vorde tU, es en vorde en oern 
Moans Vof. Dii junge Moan forleet hem sy her Tranhaeid, en ging 
taa Sseie. Man sin Faamel forgseit hem bal, en nom moit oere Freieie 
em Nagtem, en forlaavet her taaliast med en Stagter foan Keitnm. Be 
Brellupsdsi vord bestemt, en de Tog ordnet hem, med sen Formoan 
forset, sve Ysei foan Eidnm taa Keitum. Der kommens onenregens 
en uil Vof oontmoit, en det es en htin Fortiken for en Brseid. Man 
jii sse : * Eidumbonne, Eeitumbonne, jemge Brseid es en Hex.' .£er- 
gerlik en forbittert svaart de Formoan : * Es yys Breid en Hex, denn 
ril ik, det vi her altaamoal dealsunken, en vydder epraxten es gm 
Stiine.* Es hu even de TJurde ssid hsi, saank det hiile Selskab med 
Brseid en Bredgom deal oone Grynn, ex vaxet Tjdder hulv ep es gm 
Stiine. For ei menning Jir heves hjem nog yisset es grot Stiine, tveer 
en tveer seve Sid bei enooer med de Formoan oone Spesse. Je ston 
taa 'd Norden foan Tinnnm, ei vid foant nil Thinghnged, en taa eo 
Erinnering em jo Beigevenhseid vom seve sid bei det Hnged tan latt 
trinn Huge epsmenn, der 's BrceidefarUhuge namden. 

The same in the Danish of the district. 

En Pig' i Eidum h4j forlowet sse mse en ong Kael aa SYorren aa, 
te hun ferr skuld blyyy te Stein, end hun skuld, blyyy en A'ens Euen. 
Den ongg Eael tr6j no godt aa hind aa droyy tilsoes. Men de var int 
Isengg inden se Pig' forglsmt ham aa tow om Nat semor ander Frieres 
Besseg aa forlowet sse tesist m» en Slavter fra Keitum. JE Daw, te 
» Brollop skuld staae, vaar bestemt, aa se Brujskar saat am i Gtumg fira 
Eidum, te Keitum mse » Anforer i se Spids. Saa kom de da imdervq' 
semor en gammel Kuen aa de betyer int novrer Godt for en Brtg. Men 
hun ojt aa so : * Eidumbjnder, Keitumbjnder, Jer Bng e 'en Hex ! ' 
No blovy 8B Anforer sergele aa gall i » Hoj aa sv4r aa so : ' Ja hvinner 
Yor Bruj yaar en Hex, saa vild » onnsk, te vi Oil saank i se Jord aa 
gr^j Oil hall op segjen som graae Steen.' Allersaasnar h^ ban sa%j di 
Ord, inden se heel Selskob mse samt se Bn\j aa se Brogom saank neer i 
se Jord aa gr6p hall op segjen som graae Steen. Enno for int manne 
Aar sin vidst di aa yis di fern stor Steen, to om to ye s Si a senaen mat 
se Anforer i se Spids. Di stod Noren for Tinnum, int laant fra den 
gammel Thingpold, aa for aa hoTS, hra de skS de Oaang, Taa der re 
se Si a se Hy opsmedt to smaa Bjerre sum di kaaldt » Brujskarhy, 

♦ From Allen, Det Danske Sprogs Historie i Hertmgdommet Slesvig, 
elicr SynderjyUand, 


LUerofy Danish, 

En Fige i Eidum havde forlovet sig med en nng Karl og svoren 
pan, at hnn for sknlde ^live til Stoen, end hnn skulde blive en AndenH 
Kone. Den unge E!arl troede nn godt paa hende og drog tilsoes. Men 
dot varede ikke loenge, inden Pigen foi^lemte ham og tog om Natten 
imod andre Frieres Besog og forlovede sig tilsidst med en Slagter fra 
Keitum. Dagen, da Bryllnpet skulde staae, var bestemt, og Brudes- 
karen satte sig i Gang fra Eidnm til Keitum med Anforeren i Spidsen. 
Saa kom de da underveis im6de med en gammel Kone og det betjder 
ikke noget Qodt for en Brud. Men hun vaabte og sagde : * Eidum- 
bonder, Keitumbonder, jer Brud er en Hex!' Nil blev Anforeren 
aergerlig og gal i Hovedet og svor og sagde : ' Ja hvis vor Brud var en 
Hex, saa viide jeg onske, at ti Alle sank i Jorden og groede halvt op 
igjen som graae Steen.' Aldrigsaasnart havde han sagt de Ord, inden 
det hele Sf'lskab med samt Bruden og Brudgommen sank ned i Jorden 
og groede halvt op igjen som graae Steen. Endnu for ikke mange Aar 
8iden vidste de at vise de fem store Steen, to og to ved Siden af hinan- 
den med Anforeren i Spidsen. De stode Korden for Tinum, ikke langt 
fra den gamle Thingpold, og for at huske, hvad der skeede den Gung, 
▼ar der ved Siden af Hojen opkastet to smaa Bjerge, som de kaldte 

In English. 

A maiden in Eidum was engaged to a young man, and had sworn 
that she should be turned to stone before she should become anybody 
else's wife. The young man believed her, and went to sea. But it 
was not long before the maiden forgot him, and received by night 
another lover's visits, and engaged herself at last with a butcher from 
Keitum. The day on which the wedding should take place was fixed, 
and the bridal procession started from Eidum to Keitum, with its 
leader in front. They met on their way with an old woman — and that 
betokens no good for a bride. And she cried out, 'Eidum people! 
Keitum people ! — ^your bride is a witch ! ' Then the leader grew angiy, 
and mad in her head, and answered and said, ' Aye, if our bride is a 
witch, I wish we may sink in the earth, and all grow up again like 
grey stones ! ' As soon as she had said the words, the whole company, 
along with the bride and bridegroom, sank in the earth, and grew half 
up again as grey stones. And now, till within a few yeani ago, one 
could see five great 8t«)ne8, two and two on each side, and the leader in 
front. They stood north of Tinnum, not far from the old Thingfold ; 
and, in remembrance of the event, there were thrown up, by the side of 
the mound, two small hills, which they called Brudsskarshoien, 


The following seems to belong to the well-known 
nursery tale of Sumpelstiltsken. There is, however, 
no prose context. 

Frisian. Laniah, 

Ik mei di, leg elsker Dig, 

Wei di haa! Vil Dig have ! 

Meist dii mi ? Elsker Da mig ? 

Skedt me faa Skal Da mig feia 

Wedtdiiek? VUdaikke? 

Feist mi dagh I Fnst mig dog ! 

Med on Week Midt i Ugen 

Haa wat Lagh. Have yort Lag. 

Man Igenst sii Men can Da sige 

Wat ik jit ? Hvad jig hedder ? 

Da best frii, Da er Du fri. 

Best mi qoit Er mig qvit. 

Delling skell ik bran, Idag skal j eg bryggo. 

Miaren skel ik baak, Imorgen skal jeg bage, 
Aurmiaren wel ik Brollep maak. Overmorgen vil jeg Sryllap holde. 

In English, 

I like you, 

Will have thee ! 

Like St thoa me? 

Shalt me have. 

Wilt thou not? 

Fix me day ! 

Mid in week ; 

Have our law. 

But kennest thou, 


Then beest free 

Beest me quit. 
To-day shall I brew, 
To-mcrrow shall bake, 
Day-after-to-morrow will I bridal make. 

§ 53. Diatributimi of the Frisian. — This is very 
irregular. From north to south the name may be 
traced from the Widaa, on tlie boundary of Jutland 
and Sleswick, to the Scheldt. But the line is very 
discontinuous; the name seldom spreads far inland. 


In some oases the Frisian localities seem those of set* 
tiers or colonists rather than of natives or even old 

In the Dutch Province of West Friesland the 
Frisian of the present time has its widest extension 
inland. In East Friesland it is extinct, except (per- 
haps) in the fenny district of Saterland, where it is largely 
Germanised. Along the coast it has long been obsolete. 
It is spokon, however, along the whole line of Islands, 
Terschelling, Wangeroog, &c. In the parts about Cux- 
haven and Ritzebiittell, or the land between the Elbe 
and the Weser, it is not only not found, but has left no 
signs of its ever having been spoken there, which is the 
more remarkable from its being the language of Heli- 
goland and the islands off the coast of Holstein and 
Sleswick. North of the Elbe it reappears. On reason- 
able grounds it may be claimed as the older language 
of Ditmarsh and Eyderstedt, which is now Low German ; 
while in Sleswick it spreads along the coast from Hu- 
sum to Bredsted ; having once extended as far as the 
boundary of Jutland. At no point, however, does it 
t'xtend across the peninsula, so as to touch the Baltic. 

In respect to its characteristic peculiarities, the 
Frisian form of speech, in its eschewal of the sound of 
-?i at the end of words, and other minor details, while 
it differs from the Saxon, agrees with the Norse. The 
bearings of this will become clearer when the dialects 
of our language come under notice. 

Upon the position, too, of the Frisian in the classi- 
fication of the languages of the German fatnily, more 
will be said in its proper place. It is easy, however, to 
anticipate its general relations. They will be those of 
a transitional language (or dialect). 

The more complex question as to the relations of 
the Angle form of speech, though one which promises 



but few results, now presents itself, and it is with the 
third division of the Saxonia of the Saxon Versifier 
(Poeta Saxo) that it is connected. 



§ 54. Angraria. — ^The Frisian, though it may have 
been spoken along the sea-coast from the present pro- 
vince of West Friesland to the frontier of Jutland, never 
runs far inland. 

The Old Saxon of the Heliand and the Essen docu- 
ments may, reasonably, be carried as far eastward as 
the Weser, possibly farther. 

With the Weser began the Angraria of the Saxon 
Versifier, a long narrow tract from Biickeburg (Lippe 
Detmold) to Bremen, with the present town of Engem^ 
preserving the old name, in the middle. In respect to 
its outline, it has all the characters of a march or 
boundary. There is no reason, however, to make any 
broad separation between the Angrarian dialect and 
the Westphalian. There are no specimens of it of the 
same age as those of the recognised Old Saxon. 

§ 55. OstphdUa. — Ostphalia is, in all respects, a 
much more important district. It has no literature 
of the date of the Heliand, the Krist, and the 
English of the Anglo-Saxon period in England. Yet 
it is the district to which we must assign the Angles. 
Until, however, we find the Angles of Procopius and 
of Pope Gregory in England, we have nothing beyond 
the two notices of (1) Tacitus, and (2) Ptolemy. 


This is little enough. Still, the fact that it is all that 
we have should be known; especially with the view 
that it is next to nothing. 

But though the philological data for Ostphalia are 
sadly deficient, there is much to be collected from the 
geography. Whatever may have been the extent of the 
' Germania ' of Tacitus, there is no doubt whatever as 
to its limits on the east during the seventh, the eighth, 
the ninth, and the tenth centuries. In the beginning 
of the seventh,* a.d. 625, not 100 years after the first 
recorded invasion of Britain by an enemy of the Angle 
denomination, our knowledge of the actual ethnology of 
the Elbe begins ; and it begins in a way which severely 
tries either the accuracy of Tacitus himself, in making 
seven-tenths of the population of his ' Germania ' Ger- 
mans in our sense of the term, or else that of the com- 
mentators who have supposed that he meant to do so. 
This is because, when the parts beyond the Elbe first 
become known to the Frank historians — the first who 
describe them with anjrthing like adequate accuracy — 
they are, in no single instance, German in any way ; 
but, on the contrary, from first to last, Slavonic. No 
trace of any previous German occupancy is recorded — 
no tradition of any Slavonic intrusion is preserved. The 
whole country beyond the Elbe when it is first known 
by actual inspection, is not only Slavonic, but Slavonic 
without a particle of admixture, or a single fact which 
implies that it was other than Slavonic from the first. 

This, then, gives us the explanation of the text of 
the Versifier. 

regionem solis ad ortam 
Inhabitant Osterleudi^ quos nomine quidam 
Oatvalot alii vocitant, confinia quomm 
Infeetant conjnncta snis gens perfida Selavi, 

A.D. 772 (pireiter). 

* 2jeu89, pp. 637-^89. 

F 2 


The Angrarians, as we have seen, lie like a narrow 
March between the East- and Weat-phsii&s. 

§ 56. The Slavonic frontier. — The Slavonic frontier 
is, in the main, formed by the Elbe ; but as there were 
both Slavonians and Saxons to the north of that river, 
and as, on the south, this same Slavonic line was pro- 
longed beyond the boundaries of Ostphalia, it ¥rill be 
convenient to trace it from one end to the other : i.e. 
from the parts about Goburg on the south, to the parts 
about Kiel on the north. 

§ 57. Slavonians of Holstein. — The most north- 
ern known occupancy of the Slavonians of the eastern 
frontier of Germany was the country between Kiel, 
the Trave, and the Siegeburger Heath, in Holstein ; i.e. 
the parts about Eutin, Plon, Preetz, Altenburg, and 
Liibeck, all of which stood on ground originally 
Slavonic. On the south the river Bille divided the 
Slavonic from the Saxon parts of Holstein. The Sla- 
vonic district was named Wagria^ or the country of the 
Wagri; the Saxon districts were Sturmar, Ditmarsh, 
and Holsatia, or Holstein proper. Hamburg lay on 
the frontier, but on the Saxon side of it. The three 
German districts that formed Nordalbingia seem to 
have been Saxon rather than Frisian. Whether they 
were Saxon after the manner of Westphalia or East- 
phalia is another question. 

§ 58. The Slavonians of Lauenburg. — The whole 
of Lauenburg was Slavonic, with a Sachsenwaid on its 
western frontier. Ratzeburg was the capital; Polar 
hingia {{Tompo=on and Laba=Elbe\ the name of the 
district — the final -ing being German, while the pre- 
position po and the substantive Laba are Slavonic. 
Of this hybrid form there are other instances ; one, well 
known to English ethnologists and archaeologists, Kerir 
tingas=Men of Kent^ where the -dng belongs as de- 


cidedly to one language as the radical fonn Cant-ium 
belongs to another. 

§ 59. Mecklenburg and Lunenburg. — Mecklenburg 
was notoriously Slavonic. But Mecklenburg lies wholly 
on the Slavonic side of the Elbe. 

Lunenburg, however, is in a very diflTerent position. 
It lies wholly on the German side. But Lunenburg is 
the most Slavonic part of Cisalbian Germany. It is 
this whether we begin with the ninth century or the 
eighteenth. In 808 a Frank army crossed the Elbe by 
a bridge against the Lvaanes^ the Smeldingi, and the 
Bethenici of the opposite bank.* Zeuss thinks that the 
name is still preserved in that of the present town, 
Lentzem But, then, there is the more important town of 
Lunenburg on the other side, only a little lower down, 
or more to the north ; and along with this there is the 
Duchy, which reaches to Verden and Bremen, on the 
western side of which we find, with its Slavonic name, 
the river Bomlitz. This is all we have in favour of the 
whole Duchy having ever been Slavonic. On the other 
hand, however, in the eastern third of Lunenburg, 
Slavonic was spoken in the villages of Luchow and 
Wustrop so late as a.d. 1751, of which we have a 
Paternoster in a strange mixture of Slavonic and Ger- 
man, but still Slavonic on the whole. 

§ 60. Altmark, — The distinction between Altmark 
and Lunenburg is political rather than ethnological, for 
the Old Mark is a purely geographical term. Altmark 
denotes the great bend of the Elbe, between Magdeburg 
and Lentzen, on the Mecklenburg frontier. The men 
who lived here must have been, provided that they 
touched the Elbe at all, north and north-east of the 
men about Magdeburg. They may have extended 

* Die Deutdchen und die Naehbaretdmmet p. 652. 


beyond the Elbe ; but whether they did so or not is 
irrelevant to the present question. They may or may 
not have gone lower down on the river, so as to occupy 
the parts about Magdeburg, but it is sufficient for the 
present purpose to place them on the great north- 
eastern bend. 

About N. L. 52, a little to the south of Magdeburg, 
the Elbe of Tacitus and Ptolemy ceases to be the Elbe 
of the present time ; for its origin in Bohemia is un- 
known, and the Saale is treated as the Elbe up to its 
source in the parts about Hof, near the Fichtelberg, 
N. L. 50, E. L. 12. Now the Saale, in the Frank 
geographers, divides the Thuringians from the Sla- 
vonians ; whilst in the earlier fioman geographers the 
Elbe (i.e. the Saale) divides the Hermunduri (Thurin- 
gians) from the Semnones. The term Slave, or Sla- 
vonic, is unknown till the time of the Eastern Empire ; 
and when, from a Frank historian, we get our first 
notice of the parts beyond the Elbe on the (Upper) 
Saxon and Bohemian frontier, the name Semnones is 
superseded by that of the Serbs, or Sorabians, who are 
a branch of the great Slavonic family, the name of which 
is now familiar and current. So is that of the Saale in 
place of the Elbe, That the Semnones, place for place, 
are the Saxons of (the Kingdom of) Saxony is universally 
admitted. That they were Germans rests on the fact of 
their being admitted into the ' Oermania^ of Tacitus. 
But it is certain that, during the first half of the 
seventh century, when we know the district from inspec- 
tion, they are Sorabian Slavonians, or Serb Slaves ; and 
so they remain till Saxony is Germanised. 

The reconciliation of this discrepancy does not now 
interest us. WTiat really interests us is the text of 
Ptolemy, who calls the Semnones Suevi (^vrj/3(H\ 
We cannot exactly fix their northern boundary. They 


are not, however, the only population that is called 
Suevic. A second population is so named — the Lango- 
bardi. That they lay on the Elbe is neither aflfirmed nor 
denied by either Ptolemy or Tacitus. The Semnones 
are mentioned as a grea;t nation of the Suevi, and, as 
we have seen, assigned to the Elbe. So, as we have 
also seen, are the Langobardi, who are made Suevic. 
But they are Apt called LangobarcU Suevi in the section 
which treats of the Suevi. Neither does their place in 
the other text (for they are twice mentioned elsewhere) 
correspond with the Suevic district on the Elbe. 
Finally, Ptolemy mentions the LaA^^bards (Acucko- 
ficLp^i) as a third denomination in a different locality 
from the Langobardi Suevi ; themselves, when associated 
with the Semnones and the other great Suevic nation 
(Sdpof), not called Suevi Langobardi^ but simply 
Langobardi. I believe that in a monograph on the 
minute ethnology of the early Langobards these com- 
plications might be explained ; but what we want now 
is the geography and the ethnology of the division which 
Ptolemy calls Suevic. Tacitus helps here. He does not 
call the Langobards explicitly Suevi ; but the position 
he gives them in his arrangement makes them so. He 
names them inmiediately after the Semnones, whom he 
makes the typical Suevi ; and follows up his short 
notice of them with a long list of populations, until, 
having reached the eastern extremity of the Baltic, he 
writes — hie Suevice finis. 

Now a Suevia of the vast indefinite magnitude of the 
Suevia of Tacitus is a very impracticable name. But a 
Suevia like that of Ptolemy, with only three names, and 
the Elbe as a landmark, is a very practicable one. 

That the Langobardi lay north of the Semnones, 
and that they lay on the Grerman side of the Elbe, is 
universally admitted. It is assumed (I believe reasonably) 


that they touched the Elbe (or Saale) somewhere be- 
tween Leipsic and Magdeburg. But this is immaterial. 
The Suevic line ran along the Elbe ; and whether the 
Langobards reached it or not depends upon the northern 
boundary of the Semnones on the south and the southern 
boundary of the population which followed them on the 
north. This, again, was a grecat nation of the Suevi ; 
and it lay east of the Langobards, stretching towards 
the north as far as the middle parts of the Elbe — ^the 
Elbe of Ptolemy, as we must remember, beginning at 
the source of the Saale. That the great bend of the 
Elbe about Magdeburg gives us a north-westerly ex- 
tension from the Langobard, which we assume to be a 
middle district, is undoubted ; and, though nearer the 
mouth than the source, Altmark meets better than any 
spot in Germany the conditions of the occupancy of this 
third and northernmost member of the Suevic deno- 
mination, and the second of its two great nxxtions. At 
any rate, it identifies a vast and not very indefinite 
portion of Ostphalia with the whole of the Suevia of 
Ptolemy, and with all that part of the Suevia of Taci- 
tus which in the Frank period was conterminous with 

Hence Altmark, there or thereabouts, was the occu- 
pancy of Ptolemy's second great nation of the Suevi, 
and this was the nation of the Angles — 'Zovrj/Soi 'A7- 
yslkoi. No one, indeed, would venture to say that the 
two districts accurately coincided, and that there were 
no Angles on the right bank of the Elbe ; or would fix 
within a few miles, more or less, the Northern frontier. 
That it suits the text of Ptolemy we have seen. It 
suits also that of Tacitus, whose Varini lay in Mecklen- 
burg, and whose immediate affinities were with the 
Angli, And Ptolemy and Tacitus are the only two 
authorities on the subject. That it suits the conditions 


under which the Bubeequent connection with Britain 
and Denmark was established, may be seen from the 
simple inspection of the map ; and it may be added 
that the presumptions thus suggested are confirmed 
rather than diminished by the little that we have of 
the later history of the district. 

§ 61. Ths Langobards. — ^The geographical position 
of the Langobards in Grermany is unfixed. More than 
this, they are found in three different places at once, and 
under not less than three different forms of the name. 
The one tangible notice concerning them is that 
of Ptolemy, which makes them Siievi ; and this in con- 
junction with the Semnones and the Angli. They lay 
north and west of the former, south and west of the 
latter. When this is all we know of them, it is clear 
that though the Semnones and the Angli may help us in 
fixing the Langobardi, the Langobardi will not help us 
in fixing either the Semnones or the Angli. That the 
three populations were in contact is clear, and it is also 
clear that the Semnones and the Angli certainly touched 
the Elbe ; whereas the Langobardi may or may not have 
done so. If they did, the Angle and Semnonian frontiers 
— one or both — are slightly altered. 

The account of this district in Zeuss is instructive. He points to 
the Talley of the Ohre, an affluent of the Elbe from the Gorman side, and 
remarks that on the left bank there are Slavonic local names, which he 
enumerates. He tells us that the town of WolnUrated was called in 
Slavonic UUmre^ i.e., the mouth of the river Ara m, Ohre. He addH that 
the inhabitants of the surrounding villages were Slavonians. He con- 
cludes with the remark that the Slavonic Language has kept its 
ground on the German, better than on the Slavonic, side of the river ; 
alluding to the Linonian Church Service of a.d. 1751. All this refers 
to the first half of the Tenth century. Then he tells us how about a 
century later the district was Germanized ; when Albert of Saxony 
planted a series of German (chiefly from Holland) colonies from Saltz- 
wedel to the Bohemian Forest, and how the ' Slavonians were every- 
where stamped down ; and how a brave people from the boundaries of 


the Ocean took their land/ The Angles are never named, whether as 
Germans or Slavonians. But this is the area which can best be assigned 
to them. 

The Suevic character, however, of the German 
sidiB of the Elbe from Bohemia to Lmienburg is the 
only point which is important. Whether it be made 
out by the Angli and the Semnones alone, or by the 
Angli and Senmones plus the Langobards, is a detail of 
minor importance. 

A little to the south of Magdeburg, and not far 
from 52 N. L., we approach the southern frontier 
of Ostphalian, or, as we may call it. Eastern, Saxony ; 
so that a new name meets us in that of Thuringia, or the 
Thuringiana. The Hartz is usually treated as the boun- 
dary between Saxony and Thuringia. But the range 
of the Hartz is not suflBciently linear to make a definite 
boundary of any extent. Hence, we find the valley of 
the Unstrut and the parts about Merseburg* assigned 
to the Saxons ; Merseburg itself being placed on the 
frontiers of the Saxons, Thuringians, and Slaves. 

Again, about N. L. 52, the Saale from the south 
joins the Elbe ; and from its mouth, N. L. 52, to its 
source, N. L. 50, takes the place of the Elbe as a boun- 
dary between the Germans, whether Saxons or Thurin- 
gians, and the Slavonians. The rule, however, seems 
to be as it has been, viz., that there are always more 
Slavonians on the German side of the two rivers than 
Germans on the Slavonian, 

§ 62. Thuringia and its rdationa to OaiphaZia. — 
The indefinite character of this boundary between the 
Thuringian and the Saxon districts on the Elbe is of no 
slight importance, though the direct and immediate 
bearing of it is, at first, indistinct. Ostphalia, as we 
have seen, is, in the Poeta Saxo, a division of Saxony. 
Thuringia, on the other hand, is generally, perhaps uni- 
versally, separated from Saxony, Nor is the contrast 


unintelligible. It is the South-eastern part of Ger- 
many that is most particularly Thuringian. It is the 
North-western parts that are most characteristically 
Saxon. These it was wherein the contrast between the 
Saxon, the Thuringian and (we may add) the Hessian, 
was clear and definite ; but the Saxons were then the 
Saxons of Westphalia only ; and the names Angraria 
and Ostphalia were unknown ; in short they were un- 
known in the time of the immediate successors of Clovis. 

The line of Frank conquests ran southwards rather 
than northwards. Hesse seems to have been a Frank 
dependency from the first. Thuringia was the next to 
become one. Bavaria was attacked, or under the pro- 
cess of reduction. The Saxons — those of the parts 
about Paderbom — ^were about to be permanently con- 
quered; though on the south-eastern frontier only. 
This was the time of the true Merovingian dynasty ; 
and before the assumption of the practical kingship 
was usurped by the Mayors of the Palace of the Pepin 
period. Friesland was reduced by these; but the 
great Saxon wars in the North and the North-east were 
reserved for Charlemagne. Then it was that the parts 
between Angraria and the Elbe became a division of 
Saxonia, under the name of Ostphalia. But this did 
not make it Saxon afber the manner of Westphalia. It 
was Saxon as opposed to the Slavonic territory beyond 
the Elbe ; for it was in the main German. But it 
was not Saxon in the same opposition to Thuringia as 
the parts between the Werra and Saale were. It was 
NorsaviaUj NordosquaviaUj or North Suevic {Nordn' 
fichwaben), i.e. the Suevia of Ptolemy, with the prefix 
« XoHh: 

What this prefix stood in opposition to is uncertain, 
for it might imply the whole of the Suevia of Ptolemy 
in opposition to Suabia ; or it might apply to the Angle 
part of the Ptolemaic Suevia in opposition to t\i^ 


country of the Semnones {Upper Saxony). However, 
in either case it included the district which we have 
assigned to the Angles ; and, in some degree, to the 
Langobards and Varini as well : for we have seen that 
though Ptolemy explicitly enumerates only three Suevic 
nations, Tacitus, by implication, adds the Varini and 
others of the Angle frontier. 

§ 63. The Norsavi of the Sixth CeTdury, — For the 
notice of these see the Epistle of Theodebert to Justi- 
nian. Theodebert reigned fourteen years, from a.d. 534 
to A.D. 548. He was the grandson of Clovis ; but, as 
his uncle Chlotair I. survived him, his reign belongs 
to the first generation from the founder. The Norsavi 
of the Letter are the Suevi of Ptolemy; the more 
northern the more Angle. The Saxons are named in 
the same Letter, but they are not the Saxons of what 
was afterwards OstphaHa. 

§ 64. The Suevi Tranabadanu — In the parts lying 
between the Saale, the Bode, and the Hartz lies a Oau 
or Pagua named Suevongau. This was occupied in the 
sixth century by a population which, according to 
Gregory of Tours (a cotemporary writer, though one 
who wrote from a distance), Chlotair and Sigibert had 
planted there as settlers at the time when Alboin in- 
vaded Italy. Paulus Diaconus, ivriting more than two 
hundred years later, makes the same kings transplant 
Svxivoa aliasque gentes^ in locis de quibus iidem 
Saxones exierant, ii. 6. Concerning these Witichind 
of Corvey writes : 

Suevi VAro Transbadani illam qnam incolont regionem eo tempore in- 
vasenmt, quo Saxones cum Langobardis Italiam adiere, et ideo aiiit 
legibus quam Saxones utuntur. — I. p. 634 — ZeiuSt P* 364. 


Pippinus adunato exercitu per Turingiam in Sazooiam veniens, fines 
8ax<mum quos Nordo9guavi vocant, cum yalida manu intrayit . . . 


SazoneB vero, qui Ni>rdo^[uavi vocantnr, sub ditionem sabactos con- 
tntosque subeg;it. — Jnnales Mettenses, 748. Pertz^ I, 330. Zems, p. 364. 

§ 65. Ths Anglii et Wermi. — ^The Laws which 
Witichind so decidedly separates from those of the 
Saxons are, doubtless, those of the Frank Code headed 
^Lex Angliorum {aic) et Wermorv/m,.^* In its general 
character and outer form it agrees with the ^ Lex 
Scdicaj the ^Lex LcmgohardoruTn^ and, in several spe- 
cially characteristic clauses, with those of the Anglo- 
Saxons of England, which, in their turn, have special 
points of agreement with those of the Langobards. The 
date for the codes of the populations under the Mero- 
vingian Franks is generally assigned to the reign of 
Dagobert, a.d. 600 (drdter). But the Anglo- Weri- 
nian code is somewhat later ; for it applies to the parts 
on the Slavonic frontier, i.e. on the drainage of the Elbe, 
or on the Thuringian, Slavonic, Suevic, or Thuringo- 
Slavonic frontier. Professor Stubbs assigns it to the 
time of Charlemagne. At any rate, it belongs to a time 
when the Saxon part of the Frank kingdom had reached 
the Elbe. A gloss on the only known copy of it runs : 
^Lex AngUarum et Weri/norum — hoc eat, Thurvn- 

§ 66. North Thuringia. — The Saxon name has been 
carried as &x south as the Unstrut, or the parts about 
Merseburg. The Thuringian name will now be found 
as far north f as the Ohre and Upper AUer, or the parts 
between Magdeburg, Celle, and Lunenburg, where we 
find in the tenth centiuy a ^ Nord-thuringergau and a 
Nordr-thurvngerland. That this applies to settlements 
from the south rather than to a native occupancy, is 
likely. Still, they separate the Cisalbian -districts, 
whether Thuringian or Norsavian (North Suabian), from 

* Canciani, Barbarorum Leges Antigua^ iii. 31-36. 
t Zm88t p. 869. 


Saxony in the ethnological and philological senses of the 
term ; in other words, make Ostphalia, as a part of Saxony, 
a political and artificial division. That parts called 
Saxon are other than Saxon after the fashion of West- 
phalia is nothing surprising. No name on the whole 
continent of Europe has been more extended to popula- 
tions which have little beyond the name to connect them 
with the Saxons of the Merovingian period. In the 
tenth century the whole of Upper Saxony, or the present 
Kingdom, was Slavonic ; while, beyond the present fron- 
tiers of the German language, Saxon is the name by 
which the Germans both of Transylvania and the 
Danubian Provinces of Bussia are designated. 

§ 67. Retrospect — ^Putting all this together, viz. 
the political rather than the ethnological, or philolo- 
gical, import of the term Saoconia as applied to 
Ostphalia — the recognized difference between the Saxon 
and the Thuringian denominations — the still stronger 
difference between the Ptolemaic Suevi and the rest of 
the Germans in general — ^the fact that their old name 
is preserved in the newer names, Norsavi and Nordos- 
quavij imtil the time of the great Slavonic wars, when 
Saxony means Germany as opposed to Slavonia — ^the 
fact that between the Thuringians and the Norsavians 
the whole of the western drainage of the Elbe is divided — 
and, finally, the fact that, though Thuringia is properly 
the term for the southern, and Norsavia that for the 
northern half of the district, the two names are found 
on both sides of the middle line — putting all this to- 
gether, I submit that we have strong evidence that the 
old lines of philological and ethnological affinities ran 
from North to South rather than from East to West. 

* angle' and 'saxon' as names. 79 


ON ^ angle' and ^ saxon' as names. 

§ 68. jThe vakbe of the words 'Angle' arid ' SoMon* 
aa naTnea. — ^What has hitherto been written has had 
more to do with the languages, dialects, or forms of 
speech of Grermany, the comitry from which our language 
was deduced, thsm with the English, Saxon, or Anglo- 
Saxon of Britain. Langudge, however, has not been 
the special object of the enquiry. The special object 
of it has been the import of the names of the men who 
introduced it. It has, perhaps, been unduly lengthy. 
But it is a great deal more than a mere question of 
names. The words Angle and Saxon are by no means 
synonymous. The Saxon parts of England were long 
(Ustinguished from the Angle ; and, even at the present 
moment, though the latter term has wholly superseded 
the former, the traces of its original character are still 
retained in the names of the counties ending in sex, 
not to mention the great kingdom of Wessex, since 
broken up into counties. How &r this difference 
coincided with a similar difference in the mother- 
country is a matter worth investigation ; and it is 
something to have shown that the difference between 
the two was certainly as decided in Germany as it will 
be in Britain. Nor is the enquiry, because its results 
are of a very onensided, or negative, character, useless. 
It is certainly one-sided; for the import of neither 
name is known in its integrity. The term Saxon is so 
general, and Saxons are found in so many places at 
once, that those of England can scarcely be assigned to 
any definite original locality. Angle^ on the other 
hand, is so very special, that though we can trace it 
to its original area, we know little beyond the fact of 


*A»0LB' and ' SAXON ' AS NAMES. 

its being between such and such degrees of latitude and 

Of the Angles of Grermany we only know enough to 
infer that they were the Angles of England ; though, in 
England, they are known to all the world. Of Saxons, 
of some kind or another, we know a great deal ; but of 
the special Saxon districts we have no knowledge — none, 
at least, of the Saxons of Sussex and Wessex. There 
is no spot on the tiLoe of the earth of which we may 
say, ' here the men called themselves SaxonSj and from 
thence spread the nams,^ We only know that there 
were a great many populations to whom the name 
Saxon was applied by soms other population. On the 
other hand, one of the few known facts concerning the 
Angle was that it was a name which the bearers applied 
to themselves ; and it is, by no means, the least valu- 
able feu^t in their fragmentary and incomplete history. 
Again, with the Saxons, we find the language, but not 
the names of the populations which can be supposed to 
have applied it to themselves when Britain was first 
Germanized. With the Angles we find the place and 
the name ; but the only known word in their language 
is the name Angle itself. We get our knowledge of the 
dominant name from one quarter, the chief details of 
its introduction from another. 

Though those complications are absolutely inherent 
to the subject, it may be thought that they are unim- 
portant ; for it may be said that the English, as a lan- 
guage, speaks for itself, and proclaims itself to be 
German beyond all reasonable doubt. But whether 
Angle and Saxon are names which are little more than 
synonyms, or, on the other hand, names that point 
to two different centres, is a matter upon which little 
or much may depend. If the English language be one 
and indivisible, with no notable differences of dialect. 

< SAXON ' AS A NAME. 81 

or none coinciding ?nth the distribution of the two 
names, there is so little to be accounted for that inves- 
tigation is well nigh superfluous. But, if our language 
contain differences within itself, the question whether 
they can be referred to different and corresponding 
sources is one that must not be overlooked. That such is 
actually the case is well known ; for it is certain that 
at no previous period has more attention been given to 
the study of the different dialects of our language than 
at present, and that most successfully. 

§ 69. Saxon as a name, — Nevertheless, something 
more has still to be said about these names, of which 
Saxon is the more important. 

I believe that the best we can do with it is to read 
its interpretation under the light thrown upon it by the 
name ' Oerman.^ Of this we know the present currency 
in England. We know, too, what a vast import it has 
in Tacitus, or, in other words, what it had in Eome in 
his time ; and how it has, at present, one of similar 
generality in our own language and in others as well. 
Yet we know that it is not the name applied to Ger- 
many by either the French or the Italians ; nor is the 
name in use among any of the Slavonic nations. Least 
of all is it one used by the Grermans themselves. Taci- 
tus indeed says that it was a name ' of their own inven^ 
tion ;' but he also says that, till it was so invented (we 
have no reason to believe that it was generally adopted), 
they had no general name. The Romans got it from 
the Crauls, the frontagers of the Grermans on the west. 
Now, what was done on the western frontier of Ger- 
many may have been done on the eastern also ; and a 
name of like general import with German may have 
been used by the frontagers of Germany on the east. 
This means that the word Saxon may have been on the 
Elbe what Oerman was on the Shine ; viz. a general name 


82 * SAXON ' AS A NAME. 

applied by a neighbouring nation to a population which 
had no general name for itself ; though it had one in 
the language of its neighbours on each side. 

The recognition of such names by the world at 
large depends wholly upon circumstances, for it is clear 
that each must be promulgated in different directions. 
A name given to a population between the Elbe and 
the Bhine must spread westwards from the west, and 
eastwards from the east. It scarcely ever circulates in 
the intervening country to which it applies. Hence 
the name by which the Germans are known to the 
Gttuls and Britons may be wholly imknown to the 
Poles, Wallachians, and Lithuanians, while the name 
with which these last are familiar may be strange to a 
Graiil and Briton. No better instance of this can be 
found than in the three words HeUeTies, Oreeksj and 
lonians. The first is the name the Greeks took to 
themselves ; the second the Bomans took, and spread 
over the whole western world ; the third was taken on 
the side of Asia, and extends from Palestine to India. 
Sooner or later such concurrent names meet ; but an 
inordinate circulation for each as a general name may 
have preceded the meeting. 

This is the sketch of the question in its widest 
form, and the criticism which it indicates is one that, 
after a wide application of it, I have foimd to carry me 
&rther than any other. It points, of course, to the 
Slavonians of Saxony and Brandenburg. These had a 
general name for the Germans ; but we must not be too 
sure that it was Saxon, The general Slavonic name 
was Niemce, in the Byzantine Greek ^i/jLer^ou It is not 
the word we want, but it illustrates the case. It has, 
probably, as wide a circulation as Oerman ; but it is in 
the wrong quarter for Graul, and for the Bomans who 
reduced Gaul to a province; from whom Western 
Europe adopted the name Oermaru The name, how- 

< SAXON ' AS A NAME. 83 

ever, need not have been used by all the Slavonians ; 
nor need the name Saxon, as a matter of course, come 
from a nation other than German. The Franks were 
Crermans ; many of them in language as Saxon as the 
Saxons themselves. Yet, for some reason or other, they 
made a very broad distinction between themselves and 
their Saxon neighbours. 

Any Grerman of the Southern or Eastern frontier 
may have done the same ; or any one of the Slavonians 
who did not use the word Niemce. If this were the 
case, Saxon may have been from the Elbe to the Dniester 
a word of the same application and currency as German 
was from the Rhine to the Dani^be. The Marco- 
manni may have used it ; the Thuringians may have 
used it; the Goths may have used it; and any one 
of these populations may have been promulgators of 
the name Saxon in the Eastern Empire, even as the 
Gkiuls were the promulgators of Oemian in the Western ; 
and how nimierous the populations between the Elbe 
and the Lower Danube were in the Eastern Empire we 
know. It appears for the first time in Julian. It is current 
firom his time till the downfall of the Empire, and it is 
in the Gothic kingdoms of Gaul and Spain that it first 
appears in any western writer ; and when Britain is re- 
duced by the Saxons there is no notice of a single Saxon 
between the mouth of the Shine and the mouth of the 
Elbe ; not a single Saxon in the whole of that vast 
region which, a hundred years later, was called Saxony. 

§ 70. 7%e Saxons of Rudoff. — I think that in this matter an unde- 
serred censure has been passed upon a writer of the Translatio Sancti 
JlegandrL* That he has not said what he meant to say so clearly as he 
might hare said it is true. But it is impossible to believe that even what 
he says will bear the construction that has been put upon it by both the 
editor and the commentators who have followed him ; this being, that, 

* Perts, Monnmenta Qermanise Scriptorum, ii. 673-681. Trandatio 
S. JUxandri, Auctoribus Rudolfo et Meginharto, 

o 2 


in Rudolf's work, we get nothing less in the way of error and confiisiob 
than an entire reversal of the received relations between the Saxons of 
Britain and the Saxons of the Continent ; so that instead of the English 
of England being originally introduced from Germany, it is the Saxon 
of Saxony that was brought over, and introduced into Saxony, from 
Britain. If this is what the writer meant, it is undoubtedly a blunder 
that should be stigmatised. Is it, however, one that a German writer of 
even ordinary common sense could make ? Still less, could a reader of 
Tacitus make it? Yet Rudolf had read Tacitus, and is known to have 
done so ; indeed the extent to which he mixes up the very words of 
the Germania with his own narrative has been recognised by his com- 
mentators as a drawback upon the value of his own evidence. Such a 
man could scarcely deduce the descendants of the Chauci and Chamavi 
of the great writer with whom he was so familiar from Britain. 

What he was really considering was the application of the word 
Saxon as a noTne. Well might he do so. And easily may we, even now, 
see why he should do it. The problem is still before us. Up to the time 
of Clovis the name^ or series of names, for the Germans beyond the 
Frank frontier on the north, is wholly different from what it will be in 
the next generation. Up to the time of Clovis, and especially to the 
reader of Tacitus, the North Germans are Chauci, and Frisii, and 
Chamavi, and Dulgubini, and Angrivarii, and Foei, and Cherusci, and 
Bructeri, &c. ; and no such name as Sojcon has ever either been applied, 
or dreamed of as being applicable, to these definitely known divisions 
of Germany. But in less than fifty years all these names, with the 
exception of jFVwtt, either suddenly or gradually disappear, and a new 
name, not found in Tacitus, and, except to such as have read Ptolemy, 
wholly unknown except in Gaul and Britain, presents itself instead of 
them. The origin of this name, and not that of the people to which it 
applies, is the point that strikes Rudolf, and the point upon which 
Rudolf is thinking ; while the facts that lie before him are of the simplest 
sort. There is no such name as Saxon in Germany at all. In Gaul it 
is limited to a few fragmentary communities, such as the Saxones B%jo- 
cassini. In Britain it is conspicuous, dominant, and, in the way of 
geography, near at hand ; and in no other country does it present itself 
under similar conditions. That he had read Ptolemy is unlikely ; and had 
he read the writers of the fourth and fifth centuries he would not have 
found the name as that of either a German population or of a popu- 
lation of any note. We measure his ignorance by our own knowledge. 

§ 71. The history of the word Angle is the reverse 
of that of the word Saxon ; the chief points in the con- 
trast having been already noticed. The name gives us 
the locality without the language, and it is so special 

^anglb' as a name. 85 

in its application that, so far as we have hitherto con- 
sidered it, it includes nothing but the men who applied 
it to themselves. This makes it of rare occurrence. 
But the very rarity has its advantages. A Frank or a 
Saxon may have been almost any one of Grerman blood. 
An Angle was generally nothing but what the term 

The converse, however, is by no means the case, 
for it is probable that many an action of some of the 
old conquering tribes of the Angle frontier may have 
been recorded under a different name from that which 
it would have had if the Angles had been what we may 
call a representative population. 

But they were not on the frontier of the populations 
that invested the name with generality, and spread its 
renown over half a continent ; not, at least, on the side 
where the area was the broadest, and the voice of fame 
the loudest ; not on the West, the East, or the South. 
On the North I think it was different. I think that 
in Denmark they represented not only themselves but 
all the populations between their own frontier and the 
Danish which were neither Saxon nor Slavonic, and that, 
(before the Saxons represented Frank Germany as op- 
posed to Denmark,) both the Saxons and the Frisians 
may have been in the eyes of a Dane Angles. This 
close affinity suggested by the phrase ' Dan and 
Angul were brothers* is more likely to have been 
taken from a time when the Angle name extended 
further in the direction of the Eyder, than from the 
contact of the two denominations in Britain. 

That the Angle district lost its name in Germany 
is not a matter that should surprise us. There were 
at least four names to supersede or overlay it ; ( 1 ) the 
old generic name Sicevi from historical influences ; 
(2) the name Marchmen^ as men of the March ; and^ 

86 THE 'angles' of procopius. 

(3) though it is itself obsolete, the departmental name 
Ostphalian. For ' Chremarii^ see § 72. 

§ 72. ^Rheme^3.Tid'Chreme,' — The chief deduction 
from the double aspfect of the name Angle as a very 
special one on the East and South, and as one of some 
generality on the side of Denmark and Britain, is 
to be got from the text of Procopius in its integrity ; 
for it has hitherto been referred to merely as evidence 
to the fact that there were Angles in Britain when the 
extract of § 25 was first written. This is self-evidently 
manifest, whatever may be our way of dealing with the 
fabulous story about the passage of the dead, and the 
utter absence of horses. In the passage, as we find it 
in our extract, we have a Brittia as well as a Britarin 
nia ; and it is at first as difficult to connect the two as 
to separate them. But, besides this, there is the story 
or romance of the Frank king Badiger, and a British 
queen of Amazonian character. The name of the king, 
however, is the only one which is here of much im- 
portance. The part of Germany from which he passes 
over to England is the Rhine^ or the country of the 
Wamij opposite to Britain. But the Wami were on 
the Elbe ; and the Angles^ as we have seen, were their 
nearest firontagers. They are this whether we look to the 
text of Tacitus or to the Lex Angliorum et Werinarurru 

Now we know that in the region of his Angli, 
Varini, and others, Tacitus places a mysterious island 
by no means unlike an outline of the Brittia of Pro- 
copius ; and also that a little beyond it he places 
the country of the -^styii, whose language was * lingua 
Britannwce proprior. The ways of error are various, 
and one of these in my mind seems to have led to the 
Brittia of Procopius. 

Its relations to the Shine are capable of a different 

* Tacitus : Germania, § xlv. 

THE *rhinb' of procopius. 87 

explanation. Indiflferent geographer as Procopius was 
for Western Europe, I doubt whether he bodily mistook 
the Elbe for the Shine, or the Rhine for the Elbe — river 
for river. I think he had heard of the Elbe by some- 
thing very like, though not exactly, a different and 
synonymous name. I think he may have heard of the 
Angles and Wami by a name equivalent to Marco^ 
mannif or men of the March or Ukraine^ for what is 
now the Altmark (Old March)^ and that the name of 
the Elbe as a boundary had been substituted for its 
name as a river. We shall see that this view brings 
us to something which, word for word, is sufficiently 
like Rhine {Rhei/n) to be confounded with it. 

The Slavonians had their Marks^ or Frontiers, as 
well as the Germans ; and the name for them was some 
form of the root fcr-. Sometimes it had a vowel prefix, 
sometimes the affix -n, sometimes both. The most im- 
doubted and at the same time the most familiar form 
of it is {The) Ukraine on the Dnieper. Wa(p*ia in 
Holstein and Wagram in Austria are extreme forms of 
it. If a river were also a March, it might be called 
after its name as such ; and this is, really, the case with 
the *Ucker in Brandenburg, now Ucker-Mark, wherein 
we have a bilingual compound. The same bilingual 
compound occurs in f Crevnamarcha {Camiola) ; else- 
where ' vn regione vulgare vocabulo Chreine et in 
marchd* {Krain d, i. Grenz land). The occupants 
called themselves Krajnd, The Germans called them 
Chreinarii, i.e. Chremwcere=Chreinicolce =occupajxts 
of the Chrei/ne or March, just as Cantuarii, or Gant^ 
wcere, were occupants of Kent. 

» An der Ucker saHsen die Ucri, Uncrani, Ucrani, Uncri Bewohner 
der in spateren Urkanden g^enannten provincia Ucra^ UJcra^ Ukere, 
Vere, Ukermark. — Zeus8y p. 663. 

t Zenss, p. 620. 

88 m ^Knxm' or fioowics. 

The text of ProeQ|HaB bean oat this view, (a) It 
forbids us to think thmt he phu^ed the Wand on the (hJlic 
Bhine, icft he writes that thej dwelt beyond the Danube, 
and reached np to the JbrfAtfnt Ocean; andl think that 
if we aj^ly this to the Gallo-German Bhine we do 
violence to the text of even an indiffermt geographer. 
(6) It justifies OS in treating the Elbe as a March, or 
rieraine ; just as it is, aoowding to the meaning of the 
word Mirmnark, at this moment ; the only difference 
being that one name is German, the other Slavonic. 

It 'Occcr^F T^r kprnrm^w ml vtr^iW *KiPMr, Io'tc^ mirois re 
^loplCti §uA viXXm f9w^ t rufrjf Uf^rrmi . . . 09apwt S^ gal. 

— B. o. 4. 20. Zsuss, p. 361. 

That a Slavonic name for a German March, in the 
mouth of ambassadors at Constantinople in the time of 
Justinian, concerning the present district of Altmark, 
is possible need scarcely be argued, for it may have been 
taken up by any Slavonic population between the Lower 
Elbe and the Lower Danube ; in other words, it need 
not have been current on the March or Ukraine itself. 
But it is well to ask how &r it was probable on the 
March itself, for it must be remembered that in the 
time of Tacitus the Varini and Angles made part of 
his Germania, and what they were then they may 
possibly have been in the days of Procopius. Upon this 
point we can only give the probabilities. The Elbe, as 
has been already stated, was wholly unknown in detail 
and from personal inspection till the time of the 
Merovingian Franks, in the reign of Dagobert ; and, 
then, from the frontier of Bohemia to Lauenburg and 
Holstein, every acre of the country of the right bank was 
Slavonic. We know this was the case with the present 
Kingdom of Saxony as early as A.n. 625— only about 


70 years after the death of Procopius. What it was in 
Brandenburg we do not know by any special evidence 
till the time of Charlemagne, about a himdred and fifty 
years later. But we know then that it was, like Saxony, 
Slavonic ; and we know that for more than two centuries 
later there were Slavonic occupancies on its German 
side, and, in Limenburg, that Slavonic was spoken in 
the last century. Nearer than this, upon this point, we 
cannot go on positive testimony ; and perhaps we have 
gone further in the way of approximate inference than 
was needful. 

Such are the reasons for believing that a word so 
like Rhemwoere (^occv/pants of the Rhine) as Chrevri' 
woere ( = occupants of the March) may have led Pro- 
copius to call the Elbe the ' RhineJ This termination 
-^cere gives us the Crerman form in full. In Latin it is 
replaced by -itarii, as Cantuariiy BoructvAiTvi. The 
shortest form in which we find it is -er, as in Tencteri (?), 
Bructeri^ which, though the oldest forms we have, are 
at the same time the most disguised. For current use, 
or the form which when a compound of this kind had 
taken root and passed into ordinary language, was both 
the most common and the most permanent, was HiHi^ 
as in Angarii, from Angrivarvi=:EngerwcBre. Now 
this is the form which we have actually found elsewhere 
as ChreinarUf a form which, as it stands, is like 
Rheinarii, and which if written in Greek, as 'Peiwipioh 
would be more so. 

§ 73. The Embassy^ &c. — The Embassy was real. 
More than this, it was not one that stood alone. It 
rather seems to have been one of a series, probably con- 
nected with the same subject — the jealousy of the 
Roman Emperors of the extension of the Franks. 
Theodoric the Ostrogoth, as King of Italy, had sent a 
kind of commission of three kings, those of the Thurin- 


gians, the Hemli (afterwards associated with the Wami), 
and the Wami {6uaTni\ backed by the Burgundians, to 
check the persecution of the Visigoths of France by 
Clovis. These are (some of) the Noraavi of the letter 
of Theodebert his grandson : Theodebert, who was now 
King of the Franks. Achiulf, a captain of the Suevi in 
Spain, was one of the Wami, but branded by Jomandes 
as a degenerate or doubtful OotJu The Wami mixed 
themselves up with the affairs of Italy between 
Narses and the Langobards, playing fsist and loose. It 
is difficult to believe that, with the Warni from their 
Eastern, and the Langobards from the Western frontier, 
the Angles of the central district had no share in the 
great conquest of Lombardy. The Heruli, after in- 
triguing with Narses in Italy, made their way to the 
Wami and attacked the Danes, who here for the first 
time are mentioned in history. Still the Angles are 
never named, just as no individual tribe, section, or 
subsection of the Saxons is never named. Yet the 
Angles were, in the eyes of Ptolemy, a great Tuition of 
the Suevi ; and when the Suevi are broken up (be- 
coming first Norsavi, and then ' ATigUi and Wervni ') 
the name crops out. 

The Angles formed the central part of the denomina- 
tion * /Sitcvi ; and the history of the Langobard and 
Varinian frontiers explains how their name failed to 
become general in the South — whether West or Fast. 
Langobard is the name that appears from the time of 
Tacitus to that of the conquest of Lombardy, and that 
as soldiers or auxiliaries in connection with the Western 
Empire. The Wami appear only after the conquest of 
Italy by Theodoric from the East. The central Angles 
are nowhere in either Empire. On the north, however, 
where they follow the course of the Elbe, they form the 
leading and representative population, as the descend- 


ants of Angul, the brother of Dan; bo that, however 
sabordinate to the Wami they may have been in Spain, 
and to the Langobards in Italy, they are anything but 
underrated in Denmark and in Britain. Indeed, they have 
probably attained prominence at the expense of their 
associates, especially those Langobardi and Wami, who 
have similarly eclipsed them in Italy and in Spain. 
Their further relations to the Danes wiU. be noticed in 
the sequel. 

§ 74. In a larger and more general work than the 
present no excuse would be needed for these details. 
But when we remember that it is just in the reigns of 
Tbeodoric (Thierry) and Theodebert, son and grandson 
of Clevis, that the ordinary details for the Saxon inva- 
sions end, and the later and more indefinite notices of 
the Angles begin, the prolixity may be excused. The 
truth is, that when we have cleared the narrative of 
Procopius from its manifest improbabilities, such as that 
of the ignorance of the Britons of horses, the wonderful 
passage to the island of the dead, and the romantic 
elements of the story ; when, too, we have seen our way 
to an explanation of the name Rhine as applied to the 
Elbe, there is a very notable, undeniable, and important 
residuum of historic truth in it. For whether we have 
accurately explained, or merely explained away, the 
palpable excrescences in the way of fiction, and the 
alleged error in the way of geography, the fact that 
there were Angles in Britain still remains ; and so does 
the reality of the embassy. Neither is there a shadow 
of reason for believing that Radiger was other than the 
real name of the king of Wami. Procopius was a bad 
geographer; but he knew what was meant by tlie word 
Britannia, and he knew where the Gallic Bhine ran. 
That he was perplexed by the concurrent names Brittia 
uid Chreme is evident. Moreover he was cotemporaxy 


with the embassy, and, probably, in Constantinople 
when it arrived. Keeping, then, to these unexception- 
able outlines, we shall not do wrong in comparing his 
evidence as to the Angles with that of Julian as to the 
Saxons. Both are the first of their kind ; i.e. the first 
since the times of Tacitus and Ptolemy; Procopius after 
an interval of about four hundred years. Hence, it is 
with them that the notices of either Saxons or Angles 
in connection with Gaul and Britain begin. Both are 
supported by incidental allusions in writers who followed 
them ; and deal with populations of which it is almost 
certain that we have previous notices under other 
names — of Julian's Saxons under that of Franks^ of 
the Angli of Tacitus under that of Noraavi. Both 
writers belong to a time when there is notable change 
of the history of the times to which they belong. Under 
Julian's next successor but one (Jovian's reign lasted 
but five months), Valentinian I., we have the Littus 
Saxonicum ; under Theodebert's fetther, Theodoric 
(Thierry), we not only hear of the Norsavi, but of the 
Z)a7i€«, who are also named by Procopius; the difference 
in date between the two notices being within a few 
years of one another ; while, imder his successor, Chlo- 
tair, we first hear of the Saxons in Oermam/y^ the time 
at least of the mentioning them as occupants of Saxony 
being, again, within a few years assigned to their 
introduction from Britain by Rudolf. Their British 
origin, as a reason for the name, is manifestly wrong, 
but the dates coincide. That there is error of some 
kind in Rudolf is certain, and we have tried to bring 
it down to its proper dimensions. But that he points 
to intercourse between Northern Germany and Britain 
is certain. And so does Procopius. Finally, Beda and 
the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle do the same ; for the times 
of Chochilaicus (the first Dane named in history, aj). 


615) and of Badiger in Gennany are the times of Offa 
in East Anglia, and of Ida in Northumberland, neither 
of them Saxons, but both Angles. 

I should have mentioned that the notice by Pro- 
copius of the Danes is to the effect that the Heruli 
(ubiquitous during the whole of the downfall of the 
Western Empire, and whom we have seen in connection 
with the Saxons of Graul) having fled from Italy, reached 
the country of the Wam% and with them expelled the 
Danes from their own proper* occupancies. This, 
probably, Procopius learned from the Angle embassy. 

The accoimt of Jomandes makes the Danes expel 
the Heruli; but, between the two, the evidence that 
there was an active movement of the populations on 
the Lower Elbe going on during the important reign 
of Theodebert is evident. 

§ 75. EngUah allusions to the Angles of Oermany, 
— ^There are two poems in the Westsaxon of the tenth 
century, which have long commanded the attention of 
Anglo-Saxon philologists — ^ Beowulf^ and the ' Travel' 
leT^sSongJ In both the Angles are named ; but in Beowulf 
they seem to be the Angles of the Danish frontier rather 
than those of Britain, and in the Traveller's Song they 
are certainly the Angles of the Elbe. At any rate, there 
is no allusion to any name in connection with Britain. 
Upon this negative evidence influential writers have com- 
mitted themselves to the opinion that the two works 
(especially the Traveller's Song) belong not only to Ger- 
many, but to a time anterior to the accredited date for 
the Angle conquest in Britain, (say) the fifth century. 
For such an inference as this, with other facts against it, 
the evidence is wholly inadequate ; but, for the more 

* See B. O. 2, 15; and Zeuss, p. 608 ("EpovXot) ^t robs OUpyovs 
hB4w9% re is 'flmoi^r d^ico/i^yos iycurrlXXoirro. 


moderate view that the localities and incidents are con- 
tinental, it is ample* 

§ 76. The Traveller's Song. — The Traveller's Song 
manifestly points to the Angles on the Elbe. 

5r«^-cyningeB Of the JSTr^king 

Ham gesohte He sought the home 

Eastan of Ongle. East of Ongle.—l 13-15. 

The country of the Hreths, possibly the ReudAgni of 
Tacitus, and certainly the Rei^gothaa of the Anglo- 
Saxon and Icelandic writers, lay between the Oder and 
the Vistula, due east of the district here assigned to 
the Angles of the Norsavian region ; and with the 
(Norysavi the Engle are twice mentioned in the poem 
under notice, 

He61den fortS si»an Continned thenceforth 

EngU and Swafe, Engles an^ Swsefs. U. 86-7. 

Mid JEnglum iS wses With Engles I was 

Aud mid StDofum. And with Swefs. 11. 121-2. 

The whole composition points to the same localities 
and the same association of Angles, and Langobards, 
and Suevi. 

That notices of the Angleland in Britain are so 
conspicuous from their absence as to have engendered 
the doctrine of a continental origin for the poem has 
already been stated ; and it has already been stated 
that, though this doctrine is incompatible with the 
present form of the Traveller's Song, it is quite com- 
patible with the antiquity and continental origin of its 
incidents and localities. 

What the poem omits is as remarkable as what it 
mentions. The bard, skald, gleeman, or minstrel, is 
supposed to be a traveller over the whole world ; and 
the mere names of the nations which he visited consti- 
tute about half the poem, which looks more like a 


narrative put into the mouth of the Wandering Jew 
than any real wanderer. 

The traveller, or gleeman, gives the names of certain 
kings as well as those of certain countries. Of these, 
Eormanric (Hermanric), the great historical Goth of the 
fourth century, is the chief. Caesar, Alexander, Wallia, 
and Attila he had heard of, but Eormanric he had 
visited in his own kingdom. Eormanric, too, like a 
true king, rewarded the gleeman for his narrative, and 
so did Guthere (Gunther) of Burgundy. Ealfwine and 
Eadwine of Italy (i.e. Alboin and Audoin of Lombardy) 
were pre-eminently liberal. All these were patrons, and 
are chiefly alluded to in that capacity. Ofifa alone ap- 
pears in the character of king and conqueror exclusively. 
He rules the Ongle : Alewih, his rival and cotemporary, 
ruling the Danes. Alewih can prevail against most 
men, but not against Ofifa ; Offa, who made his name 
as a warrior when yoimg, and afterwards enlarged his 
boundaries as £bu: as Fifeldor (? The Eyder). These 
are the only heroes of whom we get more than the bare 
name. Eormanric is the mythic hero of Germany at 
large. Oflfa, Ealfwine, and Eadwine are, as Angles 
and Langobards, heroes of the special Angle district. 
The Burgundian Guthere alone lies wide of this centre, 
a centre for which the special details of the text are 
sufficiently appropriate ; whereas for any wider or more 
general area they are singularly deficient ; so much so 
that we learn perhaps more from what they pretermit 
than from what they contain. 

Next to Eormanric, or Hermannc, the greatest name 
both in German myth and in German history is Theo- 
doric ; and of Theodorics there are, at least, three of 
notoriety — ^Theodoric the Ostrogoth, king of Italy ; 
Theodoric II*, king of G^ul ; and Theodoric the Frank, 
fifttber of Theodebert, and a cotemporary of Procopius. 

96 tbavbllbb's sono — bbowulf. 

Of these it is the last and least that is named in the 
Traveller's Song. Clovis is not mentioned at all; 
neither is Euric; neither, with the exceptions of 
Guthere and Gifica of Burgundy, and of Wala (pro- 
bably Wallia), is any one who has not some special con- 
nection with the district of the Middle and Lower Elbe. 
The only names that are assigned to Britain are those 
of the Scots and Picts, and the Welsh (Wala^rice). To 
Scandinavia, on the other hand, the allusions are 

§ 77. Beowulf. — The poem of Beowulf, like the 
Traveller's Song, though not, in its present form, of con- 
tinental origin, is continental in its geography and 
incidents, though not so decidedly as the other poem. 
Both are equally wanting in positive allusions to Eng- 
lund; but the positive allusions to certain parts of 
GerTnany are less definite in Beowulf; which Thorpe 
makes so much more Scandinavian than German that 
he hints at the likelihood of the Westsaxon poem 
being a translation Irom the Danish. If so, it must 
be from an original, not less than a himdred and fifty 
years older than the oldest specimen of the Old Norse 
for which we have any accurate date. Be this, however, 
as it may, there is no doubt as to the English or Danish 
character of one of its heroes, viz. Higelac, who, though 
not the protagonist, is the second both in rank and 

The main incidents of Beowulf; the romance, or 
myth, of the poem ; the special exploits of Beowulf 
himself may be treated like the impossible parts of the 
geography and chronology of the Traveller's Song, and 
eliminated at once, just as, from the legends that have 
connected themselves with the names of Theodoric and 
Charlemagne, we may eliminate the fate of the Nibe- 
lungs, or tiie legends of Oliver and Boland ; and just as 


from the undoubted Frank Embassy of Procopius we 
may eliminate the account of Britain, with which the 
ambassadors, either knowingly or unconsciously, seem 
to have perplexed either Procopius or his authorities. 
In spite, however, of these we find (if nothing more) 
the names of *Raddger in Procopius, of Off a in the 
Traveller's Song, and oiHigdac in Beowulf, as real in- 
dividuals. That Higelac has been recognised as such 
is well known ; and that, name for name, and man for 
man, the Higelac of Beowulf was the ChochUaic-vs 
of Gregory of Tours has been admitted for the last sixty 
years. These, then, at least are historicaL 

§ 78. Betraspect. — ^Thus much (and more might be 
added) has been written about two poems of which the 
language is the Westsaxon of England, and the date of 
the manuscripts the tenth century. They are far from 
constituting anything like cotemporary evidence. But 
it is not the present writer who has propoimded the doc- 
trine that they give us England as it was before the Anglo- 
saxon conquest of Britain. All the present writer does is 
to show how far they help us in a question where a little 
light goes a long way — ^the question as to the differ- 
entiation between the Angle and the Saxon elements in 
our history and in our language. Something is done 
if we can invest the dualism with anything like reality ; 
and, so £bu: as Germany is concerned, something has 
been done. But the complement to this is the con- 
sideration of the difference between the Angle and the 
Saxon elements in England (Britain). This, for the 
present purpose, is limited to a review of our own Pro- 
vin^dal dialects. 

* Compoze this, word for word, with ' HmfSgar* in Beowulf. 




§ 79. O&neTol view of the three Eriglish didleda. — 
The dialects, languages, or forms of speech of Grermany 
as the mother-country of the English have hitherto heen 
considered, and that with special reference to the im- 
port of the names Saxon and Arigle. Those of England 
itself now come imder consideration. 

They fall into three well-marked and natural divi- 
sions, viz. (1) that of the South and East, (2) that of 
the North, and (3) that of the Midland, Middle, or 
intermediate districts. 

The first is conveniently called WeBtsaxon, the 
second Northumbrian, the third either MidUmd or 

Each division is a natural one ; the third, however, 
has fewer positive characteristics than the other two, 
and takes its place as a group rather on the score of its 
being neither Westsazon nor Northumbrian than from 
any definite characteristics of its own. 

Over and above the outward and visible differences 
of structure (which in the Mercian are the least con- 
spicuous) the history of each of them is different. Each 
in its time has been the leading literary language of 
Grreat Britain, almost, though not wholly, to the exclu- 
sion of the others ; so that no two have ever flourished 
as representative languages of England at the same 
time. One has been the standard, typical, or represen- 
tative language of the early, one that of the middle, and 
one that of the present epochs of our literature. 

For the Anglosaxon period, or from the eighth cen- 



tory to the battle of Hastings, the literary language 
was the Westsaxon, wholly, as far as our knowledge 
goes, to the exclusion of the Mercian, though not wholly 
to the exclusion of the Northumbrian. It is also the 
chief language for the scanty literature of the eleventh 
and twelfth centuries, or the time between the Norman 
Conquest and the reign of Henry III. 

For the fifteenth century the Northumbrian dialect 
was the classical form of speech ; not, however, as the 
language of England in its present sense, but as that of 
the English part of Scotland. It had a literature in 
England proper as well; but the rise of the Scotch 
literature in the time of the three Henrys ; the decline 
of the Westsaxon as the classical dialect (or language), 
and the incipient character of the development of the 
Mercian, make this what a South Briton may call the 
Northumbrian, a North Briton the Scotch period. 

It is the Mercian or Midland division to which our 
present literary language belongs. 

Such is the general view of the three leading forms 
of the English language. Of certain sectional and 
equivocal varieties notice will be taken in the sequel. 

§ 80. Area of the Westaaxon. — ^Westsaxon is a 
name which requires a preliminary notice, without 
which it might possibly mislead. The county of Kent, 
for instance, belongs to the Westsaxon area, yet, so far 
as its name goes, it stands in contrast to such words as 
Sussea?, Esseec, and Middle^eo;, and in that respect is 
other than Saxon ; while, in respect to its geography, 
it is 'the most eastern coimty of the southern part of 
England* Essex, on the other hand, which in name is 
Saxon, will be excluded from the Saxon division alto- 
gether. Then, on the other side of our island lies 
ComwalL It lies far enough westward for anything ; 
yet it is anything but Westsaxon, being scarcely a 



dialect at all. This is because, like Wales and the 
Highlands of Scotland, it has exchanged its own proper 
language for the language of England at large rather 
than for that of its frontier ; although on the side oi 
Devonshire there are to be found, as is natural, a few 
Devonian elements. 

Westsaxon, in short, is a political rather than a 
geographical term, meaning the Saxon of TTedsex, the 
kingdom of Wessex being the one wherein the language 
most especially was cultivated, and most especially ex- 
tended itself westwards. And not only westwards, but 
northwards ; for although, on the east, the Thames formfl 
its northern frontier, the Westsaxon dialects and sub- 
dialects are readily traced northward as far as Gloucester- 
shiie. Of Worcestershire and Herefordshire the West- 
saxon character is less generally admitted; and of 
Shropshire the dialect is still more equivocal. West- 
saxon characteristics, however, run further north than 
Shropshire ; a point upon which more remains to be said. 
The great characteristic of the Westsaxon is that 
it is so thoroughly the dialect of the classical and stan- 
dard literature of the times anterior to the Norman 
Conquest, that, in the eyes of the gnunmarian and the 
lexicographer, it is practically synonymous, and more 
than coextensive with Anglosaxon. That it does not 
wholly and absolutely exclude the Northurnhrian has 
just been stated* That it is the representative form of 
speech of the epoch is beyond doubt, ever if we make 
the largest allowance for the loss of compositions in the 
other two dialects. • 

With the ninth century begins the classical period 
for the Westsaxon literature, its two great names being 
Alfred and -filfric With the decline of this litera- 
ture the prerogative of the Westsaxon declines ; for 
the history of the literary English is not, as we have 


seen, continuous ; and it is not the Westsaxon from 
which, dialect for dialect, the literary English of the 
present time is lineally and consecutively derived. 
There is continuity in the history of the literary lan- 
guage in general ; but between the particular dialect 
which culminated in the eleventh century and that 
which is now predominant, there is no continuity. Nor 
are breaks or &ults of this kind rare ; indeed they are 
so common that we expect them a priori. Neither in 
France nor Germany, neither in Spain nor Italy, are 
the classical dialects of the present time those in which 
the language was first written, cultivated, promulgated, 
and developed. 

§81. The inflections of the Westsaxon are as follows : 

Bbclbnsxon or thb Noun. 
Pronouns — Definite Article, 
aimg. Hur. 

Maao, Fern, NetU, All genders, 

Norn, So 8«o >fet >a 

Aee. >a]ie >a >8et >a 

IkU. >am >fenre >am ^am 

Abl*i>j >a >y — 

Gen. |>8eB ]>8ere >fle8 |>8era 

7^ Pronoun of the Third Person. 

Sing. Plur, 

Mase. Fern, Neut, All genders. 

Nom, He heo hit Hi, or hig 

Ace. Hine hi hit Hi, or hig 

Dot. Him hire him Heom 

Gen. His hire his Heora 


The Adjective in its Ind^nite Declension, 

ain^: Plur. 

Mase. Fern. Neut. Mase. Fern, Neut. 

iVbm. Blind bUnd blind iVbm. Blinde blinde blinde 

Ace. Blindne blinde blind Ace. Blinde blinde blinde 

Jkit. Blindmn blindre blindmn LaU Blindum blindnm blindnm 

InX. Blinde — bUnde AH. Blinde bUnde bUnde 

Gen, Blindes blindre blindes Gen. Blindra blindra blindra 

* This {Ablative) is Bask's name. Instrumental is another. 


l%e Adjective in its Ikifimte Declension. 

Sing. Plural, 

Masc. Fern. Neut, JU genders. 

Norn. Blinda blinde blinde Blindan 

Ace. Blindan blindan blinde Blindan 

Dot. Blindan blindan blindan Blindom 

Abl. Blindan blindan blindan Blindnm 

Gen. Blindan blindan blindan Blindena 

The diflference between the indefinite and definite 
declension is not a difference between two classes of 
adjectives, but a difference between the forms of the 
same adjectives according to their place in the context. 
Hence, it is a matter of Syntax rather than of Etymo- 
logy. In the present English we say, a blind son^ 
a blind daughter, a blind eye; blind «07i«, blind 
daughters, blind eyes ; the blind son, the blind daugh- 
ters, the blind eyes ; the blind sons, the blind daughters, 
the blind eyes, indifferently. But in Anglosaxon the 
difference between the indefinite and definite article 
involved a corresponding difference in the form of the 
adjective that followed it. Thus : — 

Indefinite. D^ite. 

An blind son Se blinda son 

An blind dohtor Seo blinde dohtor 

An blind eage ^»t blinde eage 

Blinde sonn >a blindan 8ona 

Blinde dohtra >a blindan dohtra 

Blinde eagan >a blindan eagan 


Here there is not only the distinction of gender as 
in Latin and Greek, with certain differences of detail in 
the way of declension to correspond with it, but there is 
a higher division of the declensions into 'strong^ and 
^ weak*^ Sask calls them complex and simple. 



MateidiM Subatantiw — (Strtm^ Dedension), 

Smgular. Plural, 

Nom, Dseg Nbm, Dagas 

Aoe, Dseg Aoo, Dagas 

Jkit, DsBge Bat, Dagum 

Jbl. Dsege AM. Dage 

Gen, Dsges Gen, Baga 

Neuter Subetantive— (Strong Dederuion). 

Singular, Flural, 

Norn, Vfosdi Norn. Word 

Ace, Word Aoc, Word 

Dot. Worde Dal, Wordum 

Abl, Worde AH, Worde 

Gfli. Wordes Oen. Worda 

Feminine Subetantive — {Strong Dedeneicn). 
Bingtdar, Plural, 

Norn, Dfled 
Aee, D»de 
Dat, Dnde 
AH. Dsede 
G^. Dsede 

iVom. Dsda 
Ace, Dseda 
i>a^. Dseda 
Abl, Dffidum 
Gen, Dffidum 

Here the nominative case ends in a consonant, and 
the genitive case for the masculine and neuter genders 
ends (generally) in -«. 

In the weak declension the nominative ends in a 
vowel, and there is no case ending in -« ; but, on the 
contrary, a strong nAiv/ncUion (or prevalence of the 
sound of n) throughout. 

WeaJk Declension, 





Nom, Hana 



Aoo, Hanan 



Dat, Hanan 



AbL Hanan 







Nom, Hanan 



Ace. Hanan 



L<xt, Hannm 



Ahl. Hannm 



Gen. Hanena 



That these two declensions, especially the latter, are 
closely allied to the indefinite and definite declension 
of the adjectives is clear ; and it may be added that 
the terms weak and strong^ as the names of the forms 
in which the words of the two declensions present them- 
selves, apply to the adjective as well as the substantive. 
Thus bl/i/ndms is a strong form, characteristic of the 
vndejmite^ whereas blmdan is a weak one for the 
definite declension. In other words, strong and weak 
are terms in Etymology ; definite and indefivMe, terms 
in Syntax. Substantives, which are unaffected by the 
character of their article, or indeed by the context at 
all, have only one form, and are either strong or weak 
according to their own proper structure ; and what they 
are in one case they are in others, i.e. they are equally 
strong or weak whether they are definite or indefinite. 
With adjectives the case is different; and the same 
word is weak or strong according as it is indefinite or 

This double declension of the adjective is the point 
in which the English of Anglosaxon is most specially 
contrasted with that of the present period. In the 
present English the adjective is preeminently destitute 
of inflections, being reduced to a single form for all the 
cases and genders ; and both the niunbers — good man, 
good Tnan^s^ &c. With the exception of the articles the 
and an (a), no part of speech is thus denuded of its 
old inflections. In Anglosaxon, no noim had more of 
them than the adjective ; for it had all the ordinary 


forms of the substantive and the double or concurrent 
declensions of definite and indefinite besides. 

It is only, however, in the English that this extreme 
denudation of the adjective is foimd. In aU the other 
languages of the Gkrman family the difference between 
the definite and indefinite adjective is retained, and so 
(though it does not always show itself so conspicu- 
ously) does the difference between the weak and strong 
declensions. Of the former the word oxen is a single 
existing fragment. 

Conjugation of thb Vbbb. 

If^finUive — nerian 

Gerund — to nerianne 

Pruentf or Active, Participle — neriende 

Freteritt or Passive ParticipU — genered 

Imperative Singular — nere 

Imperative Plural — neria^ 

Indicative Mood, 
Present, Preterit. 

1. le nerie 1. Ic nerode 

2. Du nerest 2. Dn neredest 

3. He nere'S 3. Ho nerede 

1. We Deria'S 1 . We neredon 

2. Ge neria'S 2. 6e neredon 

3. Hi neria'K 3. Hi neredon 

Conjunctive Mood. 
Present. Preterit. 

1. Ic nerie 1. Ic nerede 

2. Dn nerie 2. Du nerede 

3. He nerie 3. Hi neredes 

1. We nerien 1. We nereden 

2. Ge nerien 2. Ge nereden 

3. Hi nerien 3. Hi nereden 

Indicative Mood, 
Present. Perfect. 

1. Ic nime 1. Ic nam 

2. Du nimest 2. Du name 

3. He nime'S 3. He nam 

1. We nimHlJ 1. We namon 

2. Ge nima'S 2. Ge namon 
8. Hi iiiina'5 8. Hi namon 



1. Ic nime 

2. Da nime 

3. He nime 




1. Icname 

2. Da name 

3. He name 

1. Wi nimen 

2. Ghe nimen 

3. Hi nimen 

1. Wi namen 

2. Ghe namen 

3. Hi namen 

This is about all that finds place in a work like the 
present. The details of the Westsaxon, a stady by 
themselves^ are to be found in the ordinary Grrammars. 
For texts the reader is referred to Thorpe's Arialecta 
Anglo Saxonica. 

In the foregoing sections the Westsaxon is taken 
as the standard of the oldest literary English. The 
chief parts in which the other dialects, especially the 
Northmnbrian, differ firom it, will be seen in the next 
two chapters. 

§ 82. The Westsaxon — Middle Period. — For some 
time subsequent to the Norman Conquest the West- 
saxon maintains its prerogative. English literature of 
any kind has notably decreased ; but it may safely be 
said that, until the middle of the thirteenth century, 
there is nothing that is distinctly other than West- 
saxon. Some influence, too, it exerted as a standard, 
or classical form of English, even during its decline. 

This, however, belongs to the history of the English 
language in general, rather than to the Westsaxon 
form of speech in particular. The fonlis 86, 8eo, as 
definite articles, are among the first old characteristics 
that become obsolete. Heo (now hxH)) = ahe^ and the pre- 
sent plurals in -<A, the termination -imde (as opposed 
to aTid and ende^ and the participial prefix y=^ye^ are 
permanent. On the other hand the final n is often 
dropped — as in y-brohe^ige^brocen. As compared 
with the other two dialects, the Westsaxon preserves 


the inflections of the Anglosaxon period, though 

Two changes in the external history of this dialect 
present themselves, in the thirteenth century. 

(1.) The area for which we find Westsaxon char- 
acteristics is increased. Dorsetshire (as a centre), 
Hampshire (P), Wilts, Somersetshire, and Devon, i.e. 
the western parts of the area, are the districts to which 
the mass of the known Westsaxon compositions are 
referred. During the Middle Period we get them from 
Gloucestershire and Worcestershire (?) on the north, 
and &om Surrey and Kent on the east. 

(2.) The use of the letters v and z becomes a recog- 
nized part of the orthography. This makes it probable 
that, though not foimd in the Anglosaxon spelling, 
they may have been common in its pronimciation, or 
at least commoner than we infer from the spelling. 

The two great Westsaxon works of the thirteenth 
century are the Brut of Layamon from Gloucestershire, 
and the Ancren Riwle from Wiltshire. In the latter 
the letters v and z are used freely, where in Anglo- 
saxon we should use / and v. Robert of Gloucester 
is the great representative of the Westsaxon of the 
reign of Edward I., the beginning of the fourteenth 
century. Here we find heo^ heora, &c., for she^ their, 
&c., the plural of present tense in -th, and most of the 
other recognized characteristics. 

But Midland and Northumbrian compositions have 
already presented themselves, and the germs of two 
literary fresh languages have taken root. 

The Westsaxon work which now interests us the 
most is the one from which the following extract * is 
taken: — 

• From Bonoorth — Dkiionary of the AngUhSax<m Language^ p. xxvi. 



Nou ich wille >et je ywite boa hit is ywent; 

>et Ms boc is jwrite mid Engliss of Kent. 

Hs boc ymade uor lewede men, 

Uor nader and uor moder and nor o>er ken. 

Hem nor to bense nram alle manjere een, 

>et inne hare inwytte ne bleve no nonl wem. 

Hqo as God is his name yzed, 

|>et Ms boc made, GKxl him yene j>et bread 

Of angles of hnenene ; and >erto his red, 

And ondemonge his zaule hnanne ]>et he is djad. 


Ymende )>et Ms boc is nolued ine in ]>e ene of i>e holy apostles 
Symond and Jndas of ane brother of >e cloystre of Saaynt Austin of 
Gantorberi, ine >e yeare of oure Lhordes beringe 1840. — Arundd M88, 
No. 55, Briiiah Museum. 

The work to which this belongs is the AymJbiU of 
Inwit^ or the Agavribite, Remorse, Sti/ag, or Prick of 
Conscience {vaner sense). When and where it was written 
we have seen. Its special value in the present enquiry 
lies in the fact of its showing the Westsaxon character 
of so eastern a dialect as the Kentish, of which we have 
no known specimens for the times anterior to the Con- 
quest, and which at present is scarcely a dialect at alL 
Besides this, the spelling, which is to some extent 
phonetic, represents the sounds of v and z as they are 
at present pronoimced in the south-west of England, 
better than an orthography of a more classical and 
literary character. This, however, we have seen already 
in the Ancren Siwle. 

For the latter half of the fourteenth century Trevifia 
is the representative Westsaxon writer. His work, 
printed by Caxton with adaptations, shows that the 
Westsaxon is now no longer the standard English. 

§ 83. PreserU State and Exiating Dialecta. — ^Wilt- 
shire, Dorset, Somerset, and Devonshire are the pre- 
eminently Westsaxon counties, the Devonshire dialect 
being an extreme one. In Hampshire the Westsaxon 


characteristics are notably diminished, still more bo in 
Sussex. In Kent and Surrey they are only found in 
fragments. Western Berkshire, and the southern parts 
of Worcestershire, are more Westsaxon than aught 
else. The boimdaries, however, between the West- 
saxon and the Mercian are uncertain ; indeed it is 
probable that the divisions so graduate into one an- 
other as to leave no boundary at all. 

§ 84. The Phoneaia of the Westsaxon dialects, 
which is very uniform over a wide area, very decided 
in character, and in many cases characteristic, is best 
illustrated by the following examples selected, exclu- 
sively, from Mr. T. Spencer Baynes's ^ Sameraetshvre 
Dialect ; Its Pr(yn/u/riciati(m^: 

Lengthened — 

Bee-ast » beast Nee-ad » (need) 

01ee-an» clean Shee-ape-i (sheep) 

Mee-olkBinilk Zee-ade»(8eed) 

Converted into Triphthongs — 
a. By prefixing y : 

Yee-ale»ale Yee-abel"Abel 

Yee-arm^arm Yee-aelsveUs 

6. By prefixing -t(; or -u : 

Buoy -i boy Guaine«i going 

Buoile»boil Qaoat^ooat 

Whoame » home 

General, but not characteristic, being &r from uncom- 
mon elsewhere. See Northumbrian specimens. 

The Devonshire dialect has an approximation to the 
French eu, and, one closer still, to the Scotch u in 
gtide or guid : 

HmM Guse 

Spiaie Shtue 

Vmeai views 


E (a) omitted — 

Hoace«hoarse Scace«scaioe « 

PaBonr= parson Yeaceafleroe 

(6) transposed — 

Birgesbridge Diid^tliread 

Curmsons crimson Begarge«B begrudge 

Hnrnsmn Hirch^rich 

Hird^red HirsbBnuh 

Hiiddicks ruddock (Bobin Redbreast) 


Beddersx better laddie^ little 

Budder abutter Maddicka mattock 

The Th in Tkm, to the Th in Thims. 
The Th in Tkme to D : 

DrooB through Dreaten ■■threaten 

Dree»three I>row=throw 

The change from F to V, and from S to Z, is notorious, 
and, at the same time, characteristic. It is the first 
change that an imitator of the West coimtry dialect has 
resort to. At the end of words 

Turresturf Leave » leaf 

Hoaayeshoof Keeayeacalf 

Looayesloaf Wearer wife 

At the beginning of words : 

The softening of F into V at the beginning of a word is all but 
uniyersal in the dialect. The following short dialogues may be taken in 
illubtration : 


* Guaine to t^-er V 

* Oh, braye I vine daye «or the «olks at the 17-er. Guaine a-ooote ?' 

* Aye, vooased too. Bill humed a voorke into the old mare's tet- 
lock, and her'a a-valled leeame.* 


Himnak, Be&nt there many vj^s in Lumuii, Miss ? 

Vmtar, Yes, unfortunately, too many. 

Wtfe, What do a think, Miss, o' thic ziUy lass, Hannah? *ker and 
▼ather walked sixteen miles to zee a vyer, 

VmUr, Were there many houses burnt? 

Hemnah. Houses burnt — noa, Miss I There beant nothing at all 
burnt at vyera, 

Viriior, Not anything burnt at fires ? 

Hannah. Noa, Miss, it wasn't a vier, but a nyer. 

Vmtar, Well, what do you call a fire ? 

Hannah, Why, a vyer be where they zell gingerbread, and cloth, and 
ribbons, and show wild beeastes ; , , . I do like vyera zo much. 

T, 8. Baynes, pp. 16-17. 

This becomes -en. 

Tra/aspoaition of S. 

Clapeaclasp Apse»aspen 

Grips a crisp Wapsawasp 

That the changes between the consonants are all in 
one direction, so that the details can be given in a 
general role, is dear. They are all changes from the 
Surd to the Sonant (Hard to Soft, or Sharp to Flat). 
The d for th Mr. Lower finds as far west as East Sussex. 

1. De song of songs, dot is Solomon's. 

2. Let him kiss me wud de kisses of his mouth, for yer loye is better 
dan wine. — Ch, i, 

§ 85. Inflections. — The following are still pre- 

(L) The true accuaatwe of he, ending in -m, ori- 
ginally hme, and not hi/m — which was Dative. 

(2.) The Infinitive in -j/, as milky =zA.S. meolcan^, 
{to) milk. Of this Mr. Barnes writes : 

The Bofset has, like the Magyar tongue, a form of the Infinitive 
Mood, which may be called the habitual or free infinitire, for an action 
unapplied to any particular object : it ends in y : 

* So it stands in the text It does not, however, mean that the 
ward if in the AoensatiTe case. It rather represents the older heo. 

112 WESTS AXON — isxisnva dialbcis. 

' Can ye mtmy V (Cftn yoa mow? in general). 
* Can ye mow this grass?' 

Notes to the Song of Solomon, Dorset dialect 
(Buonapartean Collection), p. iv. 

(3.) The Participial prefix ger ; now a or i. 

(4.) The plural of the Present in -^A. Nearly extinct. 

§ 86. Syntax. — Mr. Barnes writes : 

In Dorset things are taken as of two classes: (1.) the personal class 
of formed indiyidual things, as, a maiiy a tree^ a tod ; and (2.) the im- 
personal class of unformed quantities of things, as, a quantity of kair, 
or fooodf or toater. He is the personal pronoun for the personal class, 
and it for the impersonaL A tree is he, and some water is it. — Notet, 
&c, p. iy. 

The demonstrative pronouns for the personal class are tkSase and 
thik, and of the impersonal class, this and that. We say, ' Thiate tree 
by this water ;' Thik cheese and that curd. — Ibid, 

§ 87. Examples. 

(1.) The Accusatwe vn -n. In A.S. hme. (For 
heOj see p. 110 note.) 

Let en kiss me wi' the kisses or his mouth ; yor your lore is better 
than wine. — The Zong o' Solomon, i. 2. Dorset — Barnes. 

Let un kiss me wi' the kisses o' hiz mouth, vor thoi lore be better 
than woine. — The Zong o' Zolomon, i. 2. Somerset — 71 Spencer Baynes, 

Let un kiss m' wi* th' kisses o' huz mouth, yor yer lore is better 'n 
wine.— 2%' Zong o* Zolomon, i. 2. North Wiltshire-'Kite. 

Let 'n kiss ma way tha kisses ut es mowth ; vur thy luT es better then 
wine. — Tha Zong uv ZoUromen, i. 2. Dewmshire — BaM, 

(2.) The Infinitive m -y. Found, also, in Somer- 
setshire : 

The most archaic inflections in the dialect are the infinitiTe in •€, 
or -g-, as to mUkg . . . and the plural in -ath, as they oryath. — 
T. Spencer Baynes — Notes. 

(3.) The Participial Prefixc. In A.S. gecumen:^ 

The flowers do show on the grotmd ; the zong o' the birds is o-cmm, 
an' the coo o' the culvor 's a-heSrd in our land. — Song of Solomon, ii. 12. 


(4.) The plural in -th. In A.S. we, ge, hi, Ivfia)^^ 
we, ye, they love. Obsolete, or ohaoleacenU 

The Viewers sproiifth vwoarth in th* grown ; th* taime *8 a-kimd 
round rer th* whirf Un* o* birds, an' th* craw o* th* cnlyer *s a-yird vur 
an neah. — ii. 12. 

§ 88. Specimens 
(The more characteristic forms are underlined.) 


Eveiybody kneows owld Bamzo, as wears his yead o' one 2ide. One 
night a was coming whoame yrom market, and veil ofiTs hos into the 
road, a was zo drunk. Some chaps coming bj picked un up, and zeein' 
his yead was al o' one zide, they thought 'twas out o* jint, and began to 
puU 't into 'ts pleace agen, when the owld bwoy roar'd out, ' Barn zo 
\bom 9o)y I teU 'e !* Zo a' was alius called owld Barnzo ever a'terwards. 
— Akerman — Wiltshire Tales, 


Poema by the Rev. W. Barnes in the Dm^setshire 


Of this the following is a strong-marked, but 
scarcely an extreme specimen : — 

Mr, Qity and the Bobbers. 

1. 3. 

Mr. Guy war a gennelman • A war afeard o' naw one ; 

O* HnntsfiiU, weU knawn A niver made hiz will ; 

As a grader, a hirch* one, Like wither vawk, avaur a went 

Wi' Ions o' hiz awn. Hiz cattle vcr ta zill. 

2. 4. 

A oten went ta Lunnun One time a'd bin to Lunnun, 

Hiz cattle yer ta zill ; An zawld hiz cattle well ; 

AU the bosses that a rawd A brought awa a power o' gawld, 

Nirer minded badge or hill. As Pro a hired tell. 

* So, also, urn « run, a true J^M^Saxon fcnn. 




Rab. Zo, Bet, how is^t? How de try?— Where hast a'be thicka 
way ? Where dost come from ? 

Bbt. Gracious, Bab ! you gosh'd me. Tve a' be up to vicarige, to 
vet a book ror dame, and was looking to zee if there be any shows iu 
en, when you wisk'd over the stile, and galled me. 

Kab. And dost thee look so like a double-rose, when tlice art a* 
galled. Bet? What dost thee gook thee head vor : look up, wo't ? 

BsT. Be quiet : let lone my hat, wol ye ? 

Bab. What art tozing over the book vor ? 

Bet. Turning out the dog's ears. 

Bab. 'Ot is it — a story-book ? 

Bet. I wish 'twas, I love story-books dearly ; many nearts Fve a* ^it 
up when all the volks have a* be a-bed, and a* rede till es have had n, 
crick in the niddick, or a' bum'd my cep. 

Bab. And dost love to rede stories about spirits and witches ? 

Bet. ril tell thee. I was wan neart reding a story-book about 
spirits, that com'd and draw*d back tlie curtains at the bed's voot (and 
there was the ghastly pictures o* em). The clock had beat wan, when 
an owl creech'd 'pon the top o* the chimley, and made my blood rin cold. 
I zim'd the cat zecd zum 'ot : the door creaked, and the wind huldcr'd 
in the chimley like thunder. I prick'd up my cars, and presently, zum 
*nn, very hurrisome, went dump ! dump ! dump ! I would a* geed my 
life vor a varden. Up I sprung, droVd down my candle, and douted 
en ; and hadn't a blunk o' fire to teen en again. 'What could es do ? I 
was afeard to budge. At last I took heart, and went up stcars back- 
ward, that nort mcrt catch me by the heels. I didn't unray mysel vor 
the neart, nor tcen'd my eyes, but healed up my head in the quilt, and 
my heart bumpt zo, ye could hear en ; and zo I lied panking till peep 
o' day. 

Bab. Poor Bet ! why if a vlea had hopp'd into thy car thee wot a* 

Bet. You may well enew laugh at me, but I can't help at, nor vor- 
bear reding the books when I come athort 'em. 


George IiidUr*8 Oven* 


The stowns that built George Ridler's Oven, 
And thauy qeum from the Bleakene/s quar ; 
And George he wur a jolly old mon. 
And his yead it graw'd above his yare. 

* iVom Halliwell's Archaic and Provincial Dictionary. 

z 2 


One thiug of Georgo Eidlcr I must commend* 
And wur that not a notablo thcng? 
Ho mead his brags avoore he died, 
Weo any dree brothers his zons z*hou'd zong. 


There's Dick the treble and John the mean, I F] 

Let every mon zing in his auwn pleace, I y 

And George he wur the elder brother, 
And thoreroore he would zing the beass. 


Mine hostess's moid (and her neaum 'twur Nell)f 
A pretty wench, and I lov'd her well ; 
I lov'd her well, good reauzon why; 
Because zhe lov'd my dog and I. 


My dog is good to catch a hen, 
A duck or goose is rood for men ; 
And where good company I spy, 
thether gwoes my dog and I. 

My mwothor told I when I wur young. 
If I did voUow the strong beer pwoot. 
That dronk would pniv my auverdrow. 
And moauk me wear a thread-bare cwoat. 


My dog has gotten zitch a trick, 
To visit moids when thauy be zick ; 
When thauy be zick and like to die, 
thether gwoes my dog and I. 

Wlien I have dree zisponces under my thumb, 
then I'm welcome wherever I come ; 
But when I have none, they pass me by ; 
'Tis poverty pearts good company. 

If I should die, as it may hap, 
My greauve shall bo under the good ycal tap ; 
In voaled carms there wool us lie, 
Cheek by jowl, my dog and I. 


§ 89, The Two Colonies. — To this list may be added 
two localities, clearly beyond the proper Westsaxon 
boundary — one in Wales, and one in Ireland. 

(1.) The Peninsula of Gower, in Glamorgan, and 
(?) Pembrokeshire. According to Higden, certain 
Flemings, in the reign of Henry I., were removed from 
Mailros, in the eastern part of England, to Haverford, 
in West Wales. He adds that these Flemings of West 
Wales now (in his time) speak good Saxon. 

Flandroneos vero qui in Occidua Wallia incolunt, dimissa jam bar- 
borie, satis Saxonice loquuntur. — Higden, cilit Galcj p. 210. 

The only vocabulary I know of the Saxoii of West 
Wales is from the Peninsula of Gower, the Little Eng- 
land beyond Wales. It is by the Eev. J. Collins, pub- 
lished in the Transactions of the Philological Society^ 
No. 93. It contains nothing Flemish ; but, on the 
contrary, as much as we can expect in a vocabulary of 
Westsaxon, viz. the Infinitive in y — seggy = to tease ; 
firmy^to clean out; purty=to turn sulky ; dreshel= 
a flail. On the other liand, it shows no predilection 
for the sounds of v and z for those of s and v. 

§ 90. (2.) The Irish specimens are botli more de- 
cidedly Westsaxon, and more interesting in other re- 
spects. The district is the Baronies of Forth and Bargie, 
in the county of Wexford. The speakers are believed to 
be the descendants of a colony from Wales (? the West 
Welsh Saxonized Flemings of Higden), settled by the 
followers of the Earl of Pembroke (Strongbow) under 
Henry II. 

The following short extract gives us, besides tlie 
consonantal initial v and c, the Westsaxon dicke = 
thilk=^thy^ik^this^ and the plural in-^A; and, what 
is more instructive, the Gaelic pronunciation of the u7t- 
in whose {fose). 


Yn ercha an olo whithe yt bccth wi' gleezom o' core th* oure eene 
dwitheth apan ye mgere o* dicke rovereigne, "Wilyame eo Fouithe unnere 
fose fatliorlio rwao oure deis be ee spant. — Address (in the Forth lan^ 
ffttoffe) to The Lord Lieutenant of Irdandt presented August 1836. 

This change from hxv to / is, undoubtedly, due to 
the influence of the native Gaelic. The same occurs in 
the north-east of Scotland under the same conditions. 

—Celtic influence has changed the hwo^ hwose, hwat, hwan, hwarc, 
of StrongboVs English followers inU)fOffose,faad,fanffar — haB changed 
the hwtty hwast hwat, hwauy hwar^ of the Angles and Flemings of the 
north-east, and Norwegians of the north, into the faa, faa*s, fat, fan, 
faar of Aberdeen, Caithness, Angus, and Moray. — Murray, The Dialed 
of the Southern Counties of Scotland, p. 28. 

The indication of this coincidence and the recogni- 
tion of the foreign character of the soil to which a 
second language attaches itself, as an efiScient influence 
upon the phonesis of the intruding form of speech, is 
vahiable because it has often been denied, and oftener 
either ignored or overlooked. 

§ 91. Later stages ATwlytic as opposed to Syn^ 
thetic. — The reader is now referred to the Dative Case 
of the substantives, especially to those ending in ^utriy 
or those in which -um is the sign of the Dative Case. 
They are all single words, but single words in which 
there are two elements, viz. the theme or part belong- 
ing to the main word, and the affix which denotes its 
relations to another. But the two parts give us but 
one word. Yet tliese are separable both in respect to 
import and to form. When we get a combination of 
this kind it is called Synthetic, or put together, and the 
particular instance is an example of the Synthetic pro- 
cess, or Synthesis. But the -um, in the course of time, 
is dropped ; and the prefix to, a preposition, is used in 
its stead. This gives us two words ; and, when this is 
the case, the combination is Analytic := taken to pieces. 


and the particular instance an example of the Analytic 
process, or Analyais. 

The same processes may be got from a reference to 
the Conjmictive Mood, the so-called Imperfect, Plu- 
perfect, and Future Tenses ; where in Greek and Latin, 
we have a single word, in most modem languages a 
combination of two. 

In the Substantives the change is eflFected by the 
substitution of a Preposition for the inflection ; and in 
Verbs that of an auxiliary verb. But the principle is 
the same. 

These are examples of the important difference be- 
tween Synthesis and AncUysis on a small scale. As we 
proceed we shall find it on a larger one. The terms, 
however, are too important to be overlooked, whether 
their scale is great or small. 



§ 92. Northumbrian means the parts north of the 
Humber, and south of the Forth, and, so doing, in- 
cludes both Yorkshire on the south, and the Lowlands 
of Scotland on the north. In philology, then, the 
south-eastern parts of Scotland are English, whatever 
they may be, or may have been, politically. In its 
proper season the northern form of speech develops 
itself into a literary, or classical, language. This is 
during the fifteenth century, especially during the in- 
terval between the death of Chaucer and the invention 


of printing, i.e. under the first Stuarts. English 
literature during this period has so fallen off that the 
Scotch may then be called the representative language 
of Britain. It is certainly the best-defined dialect. 

It begins early ; it declines early. . But in the 
fourteenth century it revives, and in the fifteenth cul- 
minates. It is then called English by the Scotch 
themselves — a term which is not changed for Scotch 
till tlie time of the Eeformation. Then it becomes 

To some degree it is the first of our dialects which 
became a vehicle of literatiure. Two well-known frag- 
ments are Northimibrian : and, as these date from 
the eighth century, they are older than the earliest 
known Westsaxon compositions. They will be noticed 
in the Chapter on the Stages of the English Language 
in general. But they are too short, and stand too much 
alone to interfere with the early prerogative of the 

§ 93. By adequate specimens cotemporary with the 
Westsaxon of the times before the Conquest, the .North- 
umbrian is only known by the following Glosses. They 
are sufficient, however, to give us a general view of its 
structure as compared with that of the Westsaxon, 
and this is all that is wanted ; for of the Mercian for 
this period we know nothing. 

The undoubtedly Northumbrian Glosses are the in- 
terlineations of — 

(1.) The Eushworth Gospels. 

(2.) The Durham, or Lindisfam, Gospels. 

(3.) The Durham Eitual. 

(4.) The Bewcastle Eunes. (See Orthography — 
The Runic Alphabet.^ 

(5.) The EuthweU Eimes. (See Prosody — AU/U^ 
rative Metres,) 


§ 94. Hie Ruakworth Gospels. — The glosses on the 
Sushworth Gospels are referred by Wanley, whose 
opinion is adopted by Mr. Gamett, to the end of the 
ninth, or to the beginning of the tenth, century. This, 
however, is by no means certain. The place at which, 
at least, a portion of them was written seems to have 
been Harwood, in Wharfdale. If so, they give us the 
most southern sample of the division to which they 
belong. The names of the writers are known. There 
were two, one of them being named Farmenn. He it 
is who describes himself as a priest at Harawuda. The 
first part of the interlineation is his, and it is remark- 
able that the Northumbrian character is less marked in 
Farmenn's part than it is in his coadjutor's, whose name 
was Owen — a British designation. The following spe- 
cimen is from Mr. Garnett's paper on the Languages 
and Dialects of the British Islands, published in the 
* Transactions of the Philological Society.' 

The characteristic forms are in italics. For the 
sake of comparison, the corresponding part of the 
Hatton Gospels, in the ordinary Westsaxon, is added. 

Both texts were collated by Dr. Bandinel witli 
the original MS. in the Bodleian. 


JouN, chap. iv. John, chap. iv. 

hset for|K>n [\>e haelend] ongSQtt Da Se Ha^lcncl -wiste |>8et |>a Pha- 

[>SDtte] ^therdon \>& aide "wearas risei gehyrclen hset hS Uaefdcma 

)>sette the h8eI[oDd] monige thegnas leoming cnihta 'Sonne Johannes 

"wyrceth and fultoath J>onno loh* |>eah bo Ilselend ne fuUodo ac hys 

[annes] : (]>eh ]>e, 1' swa he, ><; hsel' leorning onihtas. Da forlet ho 

wofulfoade ah |>egna8his:) forleort Judoa land and for eft on Galilea. 

Jvidcajn eor\fO and foerde eftoT Bona hym go byrodo )>ffit ho Bcolde 

in Galiloam. wteagi dsefondlic wu- faran "Surh Samaria land. Wicelico 

tudl'[ice] hino \nBtte of *[cr] fberde ho com on Samarian cestre. >e ys 

lifrAtha bong [Samaria], com for- ge nemneth Sichar ueah |>am 

>on in tha csestre Samar', >io is tune >e Jacob scaldo Josopo hys 

^'cweden Sichar, noh \Ktr hyrig sune, >8er waes Jacobfs w;^lle. 


>sette aalde Jacob Josepes stmo his. Se Hselend sst set >a weUe. )^ 

wses wutudl' tlier wslla Jacobes. he wses weri gegan and h;^ yntB 

The hsel' for|>on woerig w»s of middayg. Da com [>8er an wif of 

gonge, sitende wses, and sset, swa Samaria wolde water fecca. Da 

ofer >8em walla: tid wses swelce Ho cwse'S se Hseland to h^. ' gjrf me 

sexta. wif [com] of ihar hyrig to drincan. Hys looming enihtas 

hladanne >8et wseter, cwseth him )>e feidon >a to >are ceastre woldon 

hseU; sd me drinca. >egnas wutndl*. heom mete beggen. Da cwkV 'Set 

./b^c^un in cffistre >8ette mete ^A^ftn Samaritanisse wif to hym. Hu 

him. cwseth fthon to him >8et wif mete bydst )>a at me drenken. 

i>i0 Samaritanesca, hu Urn Judesc >oxme >n ert Jodeisc. and ic em 

mith thy ar\> drincende &om me Samaritanise wyf. Ne bmca'8 Jn- 

ffiowes tu >a |>e mith thy wife [sie ? J deas and Samaritanissee metes at 

Samaritanesc? ne for >on ^tbyrelic gadere. Da answeredo se Hselend 

bi>JadeatoSamaritaniscum.^nd- and cwscS to h;^. Gif |>n wistes 

Bwarade the hsel' and cw8b|> him, Godes gyfe and hwset se ys |>e 

gif i>VL wistes hus Godes and hwelc cwse'S to >e sele me drinken. 

were se the cwseth the «c/ me rfnwca witodlice >u bede hyne >«t he 

duwatudr.andwoenismara,gifthu sealde >»e lyfes weter. >a cwselS 

^A>n0a^ff[giowades?] from him and \>vet wif to hym. Leof ne >a 

[he] gisalde the wsoter cwic wello. nsefst nan Mug mid to hladene, 

cwseth to him >8et wif, driht [en] and >et ys deop. hwanen hafst 

ne m [in?] hwon tha hlado hsefest >u lyfos weter cwest iSa >st >v 

)>u, and the pytt neh is: hwona, mare sy "Sonne ure fader Jacob 

and hwer, forthon hsefest dn wseter Se J>e ns >isne pyt sealde. and 

cwicwelle? ah ne ar\>u mara feder he hys beam and hys nytanu of 

usnm Jacobe se)>e stUde us thiosne )>am druncan. 
pytt, and waUtif and he of him 
dranc and suno his and feo>orfoto, 
and nesno [netenu],his? 

Here the text is given in full, i.e. both in Latin 
and Anglo-Saxon. 

Evangdium Marci (from Bouterwek, Screadunga), 

fon fruma gospelles hselendes cristes sunn godes. 
^' * • I Initium euangelii lesu Christii fllii Dei. 

swa awritcn is in esaia witga henu ic sende engel min 

2. Sicut Bcriptum est in Isaia propheta ecce ego mitto angelum meom 

beforan onseone >ine se>e egSarwatS weg >inre stem cb'opande 
ante &ciem tuam qui prseparabit xiam tuam ante te. 3. Voxclamantis 

in westenne ^earwigeaV weig drihtnes rchte wyrca)> tfd doa1$ 
in deserto parate viam domini roctas &citd 

Btige vd gongas his. 4. wses iohannes in westenne gcfulwade and 
semitaa ejus. Fuit Joannes in deserto bapdzana et 


liodade fiMllwiht )>TeoimiMe in forge fmsae Bjnna and 

jiiBdievu baptUmom peniteatite in reminioncm pcceatonini. G £t 
fennde -wks vel latrde to liim alle iadeaa landa atid 
egTediabBQtnr od cum omnis ladaee regio ct 

'& hia«Kil7iiii«!a alls sad gofullirsdo fro him in Jordanwi 
InoaolTiiiita nniTcmi et baptuaboiitur ab illo in loidaniB 
nreame onditende synsa heoia. and tma tobannea 

flomine eonfltentes peccata sna. 6. Et ent loanaaa 
g^jerslad vel gewadad mid psrnm csmsles and gyrdala fellBone 
Testitu ptliB camcli st aona pellicea 

jmb lendenn liis and waldatApan mI lopp«9tra and wndu liiinigi!ii 
ciiea Inmboa ajna et locnaUa et mel 

WK»> on wnde Ixindnm and Net bnicendo nois 
■ilaratre edebat. 


§ 95. The Durham (or Lindisfam) Gospels. 

S. Nero, D. 4. 
]UiTTHBW, cap. 2. 
miWy aiod (?) gecanned wbto haelend iu Sbh byrig 
Cnm eigo natnt nact Jeans in Bsthlcem Jodsn 
in dngmn Herodes rniiDgcB bconu iSa tungutcraeftga of enatdaol 
in diebui Herod iu Bogis, dccd miigi al> orionte 

ciromnn to hiemsalcm hin cwocdon liuei is tie sMnnnl 
TenRtiDt Hierosolymam, diccntes, Uli est qui natm 

i* cj^g Jndeimn g«scgon no foriSon tCorm hia in 

ait ras Jadttomm? Tidioiua cnim atcltsm ^nl in 
enstdffil and to ewomoo Co iTori!.tnno liine gehonia Tiototlico 
oriento et renimna adoraro com. Auiliena auteni 
15a bnrgwtcrn* 
%a hicnieolemiaca TaVS 
JlicrosolTma cum 
him aod geaomnede alio '5a nldonncnn biscopa 

itlo. Et congragatia (tic) omncs principfs aacordotnm 

and fis nSnntts %Ea folcea geotne gefmgndo fra him haar ciist 
■t acribaa popnli, aciacitabatur ab iia nbt Chnatn* 


ongiimas foraeaidmeivanga aeft ioliaime* 


in fmma rel in fina Jiord tW crist uses god mi's gode tSerh 
I. In principio nerbom deus apnd demn peT 

^ne ilea geworht ireron alle and iohanne Kxt 'woere gesended 
qnem &cta sunt omnia et lohannes missos 

gessegd is xr vd he&k him Sat$c eft onfoas iS»t hia se gewyrces suno 
refertnr ante earn qui recipient esse iacit filios 

goddes tierh. geafa his tSem firasendnm indenm iohanne 

dei per gr&tiam snam. ii. Inteirogantibus Judaeis lohannes 

onssecces hine hiet he sie crist ah )>9et gesendet -wore heseolf befe 
negat se esse Christum sed missum se ante 

ISa^m and stefn }>SDto he were clioppendes in uoestem lefter 

ilium uocemqne esso clamantis in deserto sccnndnm 


isaias 'Saem nitga gesaego^ tSe ilea untetlice geondete lemb 

Esaiam enuntiat ipsmn uero fatetur agnom 

lacdendo rel niomende synno middangeardcs sec faloande in halge 
tollcnte peccata mnndi et baptizantem in spiritn 


gaste foi^n He ilea sie vH is on ufa allmn vd of alle of 

sancto eo quod ipse sit supra omncs m. Lx 

tusem iohanne t^egnum 'Sa'Se fjlgendo neron ^m drihten an 
duobus lohannis discipulis qui secuti fuerant dominum unus 

tolanlde broder liis seSe petrus firom iStem. 
Andreas adduxit fiatrem suum qui Petrus ab ipso 

us^s genemned a^c "Son uaos gccoiged beam godes gebecnas 

nuncupatus Fhilippus quoquo uoeatus natrina heli indicat 

se^o sona bctuih otSrum "So ilea godes suni biS geondetad in 

qui mox inter cetera cum domini filium coniltetur. im. In 

"Sffim faemu |>aet uajtor ymbeerdo rel gcoorde in \nn mi'55y 
nubtis aquam conuertit in uinum quo 

uxs auorden cu'SIice ges^ne )>sete "Ser heseolf uses gehaten nin 
facto cognoscitur quod ubi ipse fucrit inuitatns ninum 

nedUserf sie )>8ete gescyrte JSsera forma 
necesse sit deficere nubtiamm. 

* From Bouterwek's Screadunga^ pp. 12-14. 


§ 96. Th^ 0108868 of the Durham Ritual. — Rituale 
EcdesicB Dunh^lmensis. 

1115, c. 10. BUuale Ecdesia Dunhdmensis, Ha sunt oapitula 
in Litania Mqfore, \>€Bt m, onfifa dagaa,* 

fiSaa CToelS driht' ymbhwurfalS Trocgas hieru' and 
'LHsec didt Bominus, circuite Tias Hiorusfdem, ot 

bihalda'Sand gisceawa'Sand socca'S in plaegiword and on plaecym and 
aspidte et considerate, et querite in platois ejus an 

gimoeton gio woer doend dom and soeconde Ivfy and 
inToniatis virnm facientem judicium et queientem fldem et 

milsend ic biom his 
propitins ero ejus. 

n fstonda'S of iroegAS and gisoa'5 and gi£raignat$ of scdvm 
' L State super rias et videtc et interrogate de somitis 

aldum hyoolc sie iroeg god and geonga'S on "Sser and 
antiquis quro sit via bona, et ambulate in ca, et 

gi gimocta'5 coelnisse sawlum iwrum 

inrenietis rofrigerium animabus vestris 

« falles hergies god Isr'l godo doatJ Trocgas iuero and 
LExercituum Dens Israel, bonas facito vios Tcstras et 

zsedo irr^ and ic bja ivih mitS in stove Vissvm on eorde >c 
stadia vestra, et habitabo vobiscum in loco isto in terra quam 

ic salde faedorum iurvm fro worvlde and V worvldo 
dedi patribus vestris a soculo et usquo in soculum 

I /god ^v ^ [^S] gisccadas from noehto dcdo vssa from 
'IDeus, qui diem discern] s a nocte actus nostros a 

"Siostra giscoad miste |>atto f>}'niIo t$a "So haclgo aron 
tenobrarum distingue caligino ut sonipor qua) sancta sunt 

"Sencendo in 'Sinum symlinga leht ve lifa iS 
meditentes, in tua jugitcr luce vivamns per D* 

{gefeiSoncgunco gidoo vo driht' Iiaclga faedor allm' 
Qintias ngimus, Dominc, Kincto pater omnipotens 

eco god tSv 'So vsig ofordoeno naolitos rumo to morgenlicum 
tetemo Deus, qui nos, tnmsacto noctis spatio, ad matutinas 

tidvm ^rhlaedo gimoedvmad ar^ vo bid' |>atte "Sv gofo vs [dseg] 
horos perducore dignatus es, quosumus, ut doncs nobis dioni 

* Rituale Ecdcsisc Dunholmensis, published by the Surtces Society, 
pp. 36, 37* 


^eosne bvtan synne of fara o1$ |>at to efenne ^ gode 
huDC sine pcccato transiro quatenus ad vespermn tibi Deo 

geafo eft ve brenga ^ 

gratias referamus, per Dominum. 

§ 97* The Westsaxon being taken as the standard 
of tha^fAiiglosaxon in its oldest stage, and the details 
of its inflection being akeady given, it is only neces- 
sary to show where the Northumbrian diflfers from it. 

(1.) Firstly, there is, on the part of the Northimi- 
brian, the greater simplicity of the Demonstrative Pro- 
noun. For this we have in Westsaxon three roots : (1 ) 
se ; (2) ^e ; (3) fie. The first is found in two forms only, 
se and 8eo=der, and die in Grerman, 6 and 17 in Greek, 
serving for the masculine and feminine of the nomina- 
tive singular of the definite article. The neuter is 
J?cc^, which is declined regularly throughout, i.e. in the 
singular number as the plural. The forms )?6 and J^eo, 
though they exist, are, in writing, displaced by se^ 
seo. He^ like )?e, is declined throughout, i.e. in the 
plural nimiber as well as the singular ; so that we 
have in Ai, heora^ heom^ hi/m, forms which are lost, 
being replaced by they, their, them. In like manner, 
Aeo, the true feminine of Ae, was used where we now 
use she, 

(2.) The greater simplicity of the auxiliary verb. 
The Present Indicative of the Westsaxon ran : 



Ic com 

"We sind [sindon] 


Go sind [sindon] 

He is 

He sind [sindon]. 

In both these cases it is the Northimibrian which 
comes nearest to the present English, where we say the^ 
they, their, them, and are, acknowledging no such forms 
as 86, hi, heord, sind or sindoru 


The tennmcUion in -an. — This is eschewed in the 
^Northumbrian, both in the oblique cases and in the 
infinitive mood, and, to a great extent, in the definite 










The Participial pi^efix -ge. — The old Westsaxon 
form of the passive participle consisted of the prefix 
ge^j and the affix -6n, sometimes with a change of the 
vowel of the root ; as, gesoght, gesungen^ gedruncen, 
&e.=80ibght, sung J d/runky &c. In the middle period 
the ge became weakened into j^ or i, as in ycleped, 
iaeen, &c. Moreover, the affix -en was often dropped. 
In Northumbrian the prefix is absent, and the affix 
-«n most steadily retained; and that in the southern 
dialect to this day, with one remarkable exception. 

The Pabt Participle ends in -C7<, but this tormination is dropped 
whenoTer a nasal (m, n, or ng) is found in the preceding syllable. 
Thus beyU, bait, bt/iien, but clgm, dam, clum^ for clumben ; Jynd^ fand, 
fund (for f under) ; ryng, rangy rung (for rungen), &c., &c. This rule 
is of course unwritten, but it is invariable. I have not observed the 
flame regularity in the dialect of any other district or any other period. 
— Murray, IHalect of the Southern Counties of Scotland, p. 201, and 

The first person singular of the present indicative 
ends (l)in-it;asic getreow-u^ ic cleopi-Uj ic sell-u^ ic 
cndredru^ ic ageldru, ic getimbr^t=^I believe^ I caU, I 
give, I dread, I pay, I build — (2) in -o ; as ic drino-6, 
ic fett-o, ic wuldrig-o, = / ait, I drink, I fight, I 


The second person singular ends in -s, rather 
than 'St. 

The plural termination was -*. This form, however, 
was not universal. It is in the imperative mood where 
we find it most generally, and where it is retained the 
longest. Elsewhere the form in )? is found besides. 

§ 98. That the Eushworth, the Durham (or Lindis- 
fam) Gospel, and the Durham Eitual Glosses are North- 
imabrian is universally admitted. The Northumbrian 
character, however, of another series is open to criti- 
cism. These aie the Glosses of a Latin Psalter (Cotton 
MSS. Vespasian, a. 1), of which the Latin element is 
referred to the Seventh, the Angle to the Ninth, cen- 
tury. (1) The orthography is other than Westsaxon. 
(2) The plurals end in -w. (3) The second persons 
singular in -s. (4) There is no prefix -ge in the parti- 
ciples. (5) The personal pronouns aremec, )?ec, uaic, 
eowic. All these are Northumbrian ;• but, in the 
Psalter, the infinitives end in -a^i — ^which is not 



PsALirus XUI. 

fdoem mec god and to-scad intingan minne of 9eode noht 
X Judica me Deus et discerne causam meam de gento non 
haligre from men unrohtun and factum ge-nero me for-'Son 
sancta ab homine iniquo et doloso eripo me Quia 
'^u eax^ god min and strengu min for-hwon me 
tu es Dous mcus et fortitudo mea quare me 
on-weg a-'5rife ^u and for-hwon un-rot ic in-ga Sonne swcncelJ 
reppulisti et quaro tristis inccdo dum adfligit 

mec se feond 
me inimicus 

o fon-scnd leht "Sin and 60'5-festnisse JJine hie mec 
lEmitte lucem tuam et reritatem tuam ipsa me 
gc-lacdon and to-gc-laeddon in munte tSaem halgan "Sinum 
dcduxerunt ct adduxerunt in monte snncto tuo 

and in go-teldo 8inum 
et in tabemaculo tuo 


. fie in-gaa to wi-bede godeeto gode le ge-bHasea'S iugalSe 
llntroibo ad altaze Dei ad Beiim qui laetificat juyentatem 


Ic ondetto t$e in citran god god min for-hwon nn-xo 
6. • Confitebor tibi in cythara Dens Dens moos Quare triatis 
eai^u sawui min and for-hwon ge-dioefea me 
ee anima mea et qmare contnrbas me 

g fge-hyt in god for-'Son ie-ondetta him haeln ondwleotan 
ISpera in Beam qnoniam confitebor illi salntem Tultus 

mines and god min 
mei et Dens mens 


{god midearom nrom we go-herdun and fedras ure 
Dens anribns nostris andivimus et patres nostri annnn- 

segdun ns 
ciavemnt nobis 

were iStdt wircende Hvl earS in degum heara and in dttgnm 
Opus qnod operatus es in diebus eorum et in diebns 
tSam alldum 
( honda "Sine tSeode to-stencelS and tSu ge-plantades hie iSu swentes 
\ Manns tna gentes disperdet et plantasti eos adflizisti 
folc and on>weg a-drife hie 
popolos et ezpulisti eos 

{na-les so'5-lice in sweorde his ge^sitta'S eorSan and earm 
Nee enim in gladio suo possidebnnt terram et brachinm 

heara ne ge-helerS hie 

eorum non salvabit eos 

ah sie swi'Sre din and earm tSin and in-lihtnis ondwleolan 

Sed dextera toa et brachinm tuum et inlnminatio rultus 

Iflnes for-^n ge-licade Ve in him 

tui quoniam oomphicuit tibi in illis 
, r Vn ear(S se ilea cyning min and god min tSn on-bnde 
' L Tn es ipse rex mens et Dens mens qui mandas sa- 


lutem Jacob 

iSe fiond ure we windwiatS and in noman Vinum 
te inimicos nostros yentilavimns et in nomine tuo 

we for-hycgatS a-risende in ns 
spenumns insoxgentes in not 


I In 


130 '^^^ PSALTEB. 

m fnarles so1$-lice in bogan minum ic ge-hyhto and sweoid min ne 
LNon enim area meo sperabo et gladius meuB non 

ge-haele^ me 
salvabit me 

{iSvL ge-freades sot^-lice nsic of ISsem swencendom usic and ^ t$a 
Salyasti enim nos ex adfligentibns nos et eos qui 
usic fiedon "Sa ge-stea'SelafSes 
nos oderunt confadisti 

g fin gode we biot$ here aline deg and in noman dinnm we- 
Lin Deo laudabimnr tota die et in nomine tao confi- 

ondettafS in weorolde 
tebimur in saecula. 

§ 99. The bearing of the forms in -an and -a upon 
the history of the Northiunbrian English is important. 
The Psalter has a claim to be considered as old as, and 
possibly older than, any one of the other three ; whilst, 
philologically, -an is an older form than -a. If so, the 
-n may have been lost to the Northumbrian dialects on 
Northumbrian soil ; in other words the forms in -a need 
not be assigned to the Angle in its older stages, but re- 
ferred to the influence of the Danes of the eighth, ninth, 
tenth, and eleventh centuries. The complications of 
opinion to which this view may give rise are numerous. 
Thus the notion that the Danish influence in Britain is 
later than the English is one that, though long current, 
is now gradually losing its supporters ; the tendency of 
opinion being in favour of the earliest Danish invasions 
having been as old as those of the Angles; or (if this be 
not exactly the case) that the diflference between the 
oldest English and the oldest Danish is not very great. 
Then comes the tendency to explain the use of the -a 
for -an through the Frisian, which is, practically, identi- 
fied with the Angle. That in all this we have the ele- 
ments of a very complex and doubtful question as to the 
actual relations of the three languages to each other is 


manifiBst. Nor is the existence of considerable differences 
of opinion concerning it doubtful. 

The most important peculiarity in which the Durham Eyangeles and 
the Bitual differ from the Psalter is the form of the inflnitive mood in 
yerbs. This, in the Durham books, is, with the exception of one word, 
beon, esse, invariablj formed in -a, not in -an, the usual form in all the 
other Anglosaxon dialects. Now this is a peculiarity of the Frisic, 
and of the Old Norse, and is found in no other Germanic tongue ; it is 
then an interesting inquiry whether the one or the other of these 
tongues is the origin of this peculiarity ; whether, in short, it belongs 
to the old, the original Frisic form, which prevailed in the fifth, sixth, 
and seventh centuries, or whether it is owing to Norse influence, acting 
in the ninth and tenth through the establishment of Danish invaders 
and a Danish dynasty In the countries north of the Humber. — KembU, 
Pkiloloffical D^ansaetianSt No. 36. 

§ 100. Though this is, to some extent, an anticipa^ 
tion of certain remarks which will be made hereafter, 
I take the earliest opportunity of stating that, unless 
we recognise the probability of certain forms of the 
Danish being sufficiently near to certain forms of the 
Frisian, or some dialect sufficiently like the English, to 
pass for members of the same class, the place of the 
Danes in the Germanization of Britain can never be 
adequately investigated. The ordinary accoimts are 
that in certain years of the eighth century certain 
Danes invaded certain parts of England ; and that, 
after a time, they wintered in the districts on which 
they made their attack. These inroads are notified 
in the Anglosaxon Chronicle imder their several 
dates : the general tenor of the entries is that they 
were the earliest of their kind ; just as the invasions of 
Hengist and Horsa were, m/utatia mutandis^ the first 
of their kind. If so, they exclude any previous ones 
—except, of course, that of the Jutes in Kent, who^ 
whether real or not, have left no trace of Danish occu- 
panqr behind them. Putting these, however, out of 



the question, we get the two specific dates of a.b. 787, 
and A.D. 789, as approximations for the beginning of 
the Danish invasions ; and they are sufficiently precise. 


A.D. 787. Cyomon serist III scipa Northmanna of Heretha lande. 

. . . That 'wseron [>a serestan scipu Deniscra monna the ADgelojniies 

land gesohton. 

ABSBB (a.d. 789.) 

Eo etiam tempore primvm tree naves Nomuamorumf id est Danorumt 
applicuerunt in insula qniB dicitnr Portland. 

The question is whether these dates, though good for 
Wessex, are good for the north of England in being so 
decided as to exclude all other Danes from any part of 
our island. 

§ 101. After these Glosses comes a great break ; for, 
imtil the last quarter of the thirteenth century, there 
will scarcely be any Northumbrian compositions of even 
the dimensions of a G-loss. 

Of these the earliest are referable to Durham and 
Yorkshire. During the first half of the fourteenth 
century the literature increases. Still it belongs to the 
coimtry south of the Tweed ; in other words is Eng- 
lish, rather than Scottish, Northumbrian. 

For the literature north of the Tweed, or of the 
Northiunbrian of Scotland, a.b. 1375 is a convenient 
date. Barbour's Bruce, as the author himself tells us, 
was partly written at this time ; and Barbour's Bruce 
is in some respects, though not altogether, the oldest 
specimen of the Scotch Northumbrian. Fragments of 
a song on the siege of Berwick under Edward L, 1296 ; 
on the battle of Bannockbum, 1314 ; and, earlier still, 
one on the troubles that followed the death of Alex- 
ander III., are older. But they are only known as 
preserved by later writers ; and, with certain undoubted 
changes of text. The objection here involved applies 


to Barbour himself. His text is later than that of the 
date of his work. 

Hence the date of the earliest known specimen both 
of the language and the orthography of the Northum- 
brian of Scotland during themidcUe period is a.d. 1385, 
the composition being the * record of an award made 
by Andrew Mercer, Lord of Mekylhour, in a dispute as 
to the ownership of certain lands, between Robert 
Stewart, Earl of Fife (afterwards Regent Albany), and 
Sir John of Logic.' The original is in the Charter 
chest of the Stewarts of Grandtully, and has been re- 
produced in facsimile in a volume privately printed by 
the late Sir William Stewart under the title of * The 
Red Book of Grandtully.' 

* Tyl al )»at |>ir« lettrys herys or seys Andrew mercer lorde of Mekyl- 
honre gretyng in god ay lestand tyl yhnie vniu^rsite be wyttyn )>at my 
redoutyt lorde syr Robart Stewart Eryl of fiyfe and Menteth and Ion of 
Log^ sqnyere ]>6 sune and ]>6 ayre of syr Ion of Logy knycht of |>aire 
tre wyl nane beand present bot we thre before nemnyt put in myne or- 
denans al ]>e debate and ]>e qnestyot/n hat wes be twene )>aim for >e 
landys of log^ and of Stragartnay and how eyyr hat I ordaynyt and de- 
t«rmynyt haim to do he forsayde syr Kobart and Ion faythfully heht 
strekand hair^ handys in myne bodely makand gude fayth hat hai sulde 
halde sckr^ ferme.and stabyl nnd his like forsayde Cunand made apon 
his cause .before wryt3m he forsayde syr Robart and Ion reuuleyt and 
afermyt in he protens of myne excellent prynce Robart thrw he grace of 
god kynge of Scotland and his Eldeste sune Ion Eryl of Carryke / 
Maysttr Dunckane petyte Ersdene of Murrefe and thome of Rate and 
In he tyme h&t I he forsayde Androw assentyt to resayve his cause 
before wrytyn in myne ordenans and hare of to g^ lugement be he 
reoorde of my twnge I made bodely fayth it ryhtwysly to deme.' * 

From the date of this record to the present time the 
history of the English of Northumbria north of the 
Tweed is mainly that of a national literature ; and, so. 
fiur as it is this, it forms a separate subject. Moreover 

* From an * Addition to Dr. Murray's Dialect of Southern Scotland/ 
P. 92 (A note ( — 4 pp.) published a few weeks after the main work). 


this, one which is better in the hands of Scotchmen than 
of Englishmen. 

Of the Northumbrian south of the Tweed, as a 
literary language, there is not much more to be said. 
As far south as Hampole (near Doncaster) it was, during 
the fourteenth century, quite as Scotch in character as 
the difference of date and place would lead us to expect; 
perhaps more so. But it is only on the east that this 
uniformity is found. In Cumberland and Westmor- 
land (?) the dialect, though undoubtedly Northumbrian, 
was far more unlike the Northumbrian of Edinburgh, 
Durham, and South Yorkshire than those dialects (if the 
difiFerence amoimts to one of dialects) are imlike each 

Hence, if it were incimibfent upon us to divide the 
great Northumbrian class of dialects into two divisions, 
they would not be those of north and south so much as 
those of east and west. And this is what we expect a 
priori. The British, both of South Britain and North 
Britain, maintained itself longer in Cumberland and in 
Gulloway than the Lothians. Without bringing in the 
mysterious Picts we may safely assert this. 

The more definite evidence for the closer philo- 
logical connection between York and Edinburgh than 
between York and Carlisle must be sought in the dia- 
lects themselves. And these are, to say the least, fairly 
represented by the literature of the Middle period, as 
are the West Mercian dialects ; for which see Chap. XI. 

§ 102. Upon the relations of those dialects which lay 
north-west, rather due north of the Humber, those of 
Ciunberlandy and part of Lancashire most especially, 
more will be said in the notice of the Mercian, or 
Midland class. At present, however, the Northern 
forms of speech will be considered, as far as South 
Lancashire, as Northumbrian ; and certain divisions 


or subdivisions of them considered. In Cumberland, 
there is, doubtless, a sectional division of some kind ; 
but it is, in my mind, formed too much on single 
characters to be one of any great breadth. I cannot 
forbear thinking that the Danish element for these 
parts is overvalued. The hard and sharp line which 
Mr. Dickinson draws for his Central Cumberland dia- 
lect is scarcely tenable. He carries it from the mouth of 
the Eden to Egremont ; thence by an irregular line to 
Kirkland, Croglin, Sebergham, Wamell Fell, Brockle- 
bank, and Aspatria, to Allonby, south of which line 
it gradually merges into the Lancashire, and, on the 
north, becomes intermixed with Scotch, and dashed with 
the Northumberland. This gives us the southern part 
of West Cumberland, and a small part of East Cum- 
berland ; the remainder (by fiu: the greater part) 
being, more or less, Lancastrian. This range of the 
chief characteristic, the elliptic article (<' for the)^ goes 
far beyond these limits. As compared, however, with the 
North Cumbrian it difiFers ; for North Cumbrian {Ray- 
son) gives the full form the. And so does the Scotch. 
So, also, the Northumbrian. There is every reason why 
the elliptic form should claim attention. On the other 
hand, it is easily overvalued. 

Again, the extent to which this line separates the 
Danish from the non-Danish districts is not beyond 
abjection. If we take the syllable -6y, when it implies 
m occupancy (like -ton in English), as a presumption in 
favour of the town or village to which it applies having 
been a Danish occupancy, it is by no means good. That 
local names thus ending are rarer to the north of the 
line than to the south of it is true. But even in the 
lorth we have them ; viz. WiUardyy^ Sccdeby^ and others. 

That these may represent the Danes of Eskdale and 
^nandale, while the more numerous -iya of Central 


Cumberland may represent those of Yorkshire (cross- 
ing the watershed of the Ouse and Eden about Kirkby 
Lonsdale), is likely; but, still, they abate the value 
of the line as a Danish, or non-Danish, frontier. That 
in Durham and Northumberland there are no 'bya is 
well known, and that the watershed of the Wear and 
Eden gives us a natural boundary of some value is 
true ; but even this gives the elliptic f to Durham, as, 
indeed, it does to other districts besides. As opposed, 
however, to Durham and Northumberland, Cumberland 
(so long as the affix -iy is a test) is Danish. 

For the Northumbrian dialects south of the Tweed, 
to which we limit ourselves, no specimens of what 
may be called the native provincial literature will be 
given. They were given in the notice of the West- 
saxon because thev were needed to show how certain 
inflections were still retained. But the inflectional 
system of the Northumbrian was comparatively simple 
from the beginning ; and here the only important one of 
which we find trace is the plural of the verb in -«, i.e. 
they loves = tJiey love. The distribution of this, as deter- 
mined by the Buonapartean versions of the Canticle, is 
as follows. They give us the same matter in different 
forms ; and as the chief point in recent Northumbrian 
philology is the exhibition of the phonetic variations, 
they are, in a work like the present, sufficient. 

§ 103. 
Northurriherland (J. P. Bobson). 

Chap. IL 

1. Aw*8 the rose </ Shaioii, an' the lily o' the vslleys. 

2. Like a lily mang thorns is maw luve amang the dowtors. 

3. Like a napple-tree mang the trees o* the wnd, is maw lure amang 
the sons. Aw sets me ways doon anunder his shador wiy a leet heart, 

: an' his froot teastid Tena nice. 



4. He fttdit us intiy his feastixi-hoose, an' his flag abeon us wis 

6. Hand «■ up wi' dzinkixi-caps, cmnfort ns wiy apples, for aVs 
bad o' hive. 

6. His left ban's annnder me heed, an' his reet hand cuddles ns. 

7. Noo aw chaiige ye, ye dowtors o' Jemilnm, be the backs an' 
the does o^ the field, thit ye dinnet stor, to xoose up maw lave till he 
hes a miDd. 

8. "Wheest ! if s the voice o' maw Inve ! Lenk ! thondor he cums 
lowpin' upon the moontins, an' sknrzyin' uwer the hills. 

9. Maw troo-lnve 's like a bnck or leish deer : assa ! he 's stannin' 
ahint wor wa' : he's lenkin' oot o' the windors, an' showin' hissel' thro' 
the panes. 

Newcastle {J. P. Bobson), 

Chaptkb IL 

1. Aw's the rose o' Sharon, an' the lily o' the Talleys. 

2. Like the lily amang thorns, se is maw lays amang the dowtors. 

3. Like the apple-tree amang the trees o' the wud, se is maw belnv'd 
amang the sons. Aw sat doon anun'er his shador wi' greet plishnr', an' 
his froot wis sweet te me teyst. 

4. He browt ns te the feastin'-hoose, an' his flag ower ns wis Inve. 
6. Stop ns wi' tankerts, cumfort ns wiv apples : for aw's seek o' 


6. His left ban's annn'er me heed, an' his reet ban' dis cuddle me. 

7. Aw chairge ye, ye dowtors o' Jeruzalum, be the roes an' the 
stegs o' the field, thit ye divent stor, nor weykin maw luye tiye he 

8. The voice o' maw beluVd I lucka, be cums lowpin* on the moon- 
tins, skippin' ower the hills. 

9. Maw beluVd 's like a roe or a young buck : seeet the', he stan's 
ahint wor wa', he luiks oot it the windis, an' shows hissel' throo the 

Durham (as spoken at St. John's Chapel, Weardale. — 

T. Moore). 

CHAPraB n. 

1. A* as f rose nv Sharon, an t' lilley ud valleys. 

2. As t' lilley amang thowms, sees me luv amang t' dowters. 

3. As t' apple-tree amang t' trees nd wood, sees me beluved amang 
t' sons. Ah sat doon unnonder his shaddow wih greet deleyght, an his 
firewt was sweet to me taaste. 

4. He brovght mah tud banqueting boose, an his banner ower mah 


5. Stay mah wih flaggons, cumfart mah wih apples : for a' as seek 
uv luv. 

6. His left kneaf 's unnonder me heed, an his real kneaf duth 
cuddle mah. 

7. Ah charge ye, ye dowters ut Jerewsalem, be t' roes, an be t' 
heynds nd field, at ye stur nnt np, ner waaken me luv, till he please. 

b. T* voice uv me beluved ! behowld, he cumeth lowpin atoppa t' 
moontens, skippin atoppa t' hills. 

9. Me beluved 's leyke a roe er a young hart : behuwld, he stands 
ahint our wo, he lewka furth at t* windows, showen hissel through t' 

North Ridmg of Yorkahvre (parta about Whitby), — 
By the Author of * A Glossary of Yorkshire Words 
and Phrases, collected in Whitby and the Neigh- 

Chaptxr IL 

1. Hah am the rose o* Sharon, and the lily of the valleys. 

2. As the lily amang the breers, sae is mah honey amang the 

3. As the apple-tree amang the trees o' the wood, sae is mah 
beluYved amang the sons. Hah sat down under his shadow wi* greeat 
deleet, an' his firuit was sweet to mah teeast. 

4. He browt me to t' feeasting-hoose, an* his banner ower me was luv. 
6. Stay me wi' flagons, cumfort me wi' apples, for hah's seek o' luv. 

6. His left hand is xmder mah heead, and his reet hand laps round 

7. Hah chaarge ye, ye dowters o' Jerusalem, by the roes an' by 
the hinds o' the field, that ye stoor nut up nor wakken mah luv till he 

8. The voice of mah beluwed I seesthee, he comes lowpin upon the 
mountains, boundin ower the hills. 

9. Mah beluwed is like a roe or a young hart; lothee! he stands 
ahint oor wall, he looks out at the windows, showing his^sel at the 

Cumberland (J. Bayson). 

Chaftkb n. 

1. I am the rwose o' Sharon, an' the lillie o' the vallies. 

2. As the lillie amang thwoms, sae is my luive amang the dowten. 

3. As the apple-tree amang the trees o' the wud, sae is my beluivet 


smang the sons. I tat doan animder his shaddow wi' mnckle deleyght, 
an* his fimte was sweet tui mj teaste. 

4. He bzong me tui the banqaetin* hwons, an' his bannir ower me 
was loire. 

6. Stay me wi' flaggans, cnmfert me wi' apples : for I am seek o' luiye. 

6. His left han' is annnder my heed, an' his reet han' infanls me. 

7. I weam yon, ye dowters o' Jernsalem, by the rwoes, an' 
heynee o* the ftel', that ye stnr nit up, ner awaeken my Inive till he 

8. The Toyoe o' my beluiret! behauld, he cnms loupin' upon the 
mwountans, skippin' apon the hills. 

9. My belniyet is leyke a rwoe, or a young buck: behauld, he stans 
ahint our waw, he luiks owt at the wendaws, showin' hissel owtseyde 
the lettioe. 

C&niral Cumberlcmd (W, Dickinson). 

1. Ise t^ rwose o* Sharon, an' t' lily o* t' Talleys. 

2. My leUTT wad leukk amang t' rest as a Uly wad leukk amang 

8. An' he wad leukk amang other men as a apple-tree i' full bleumm 
wad leukk in a wood of other sworts o' trees. 

4. He brought ma to t' feast, an' aa fiind as if his leuvr was o' 
ower ma. 

6. Stop ma wid flagon^ comfort ma wid apples, for aa 's seek o* leuw. 

6. His left hand 's onder my heed, an' his reet hand coddles ma. 

7. Aa forbid ye, ye dowters o' Jerusalem, by t' roes an' t' hinds 
in t' fields 'at ye disturb nut, ner woken my leuw, till he pleases. 

8. My leuYv's voyce I see ya, he comes lowpan ower t' fells, an* 
skippan ower t' knowes. 

9. My leuYT is like a roe, or a young buck : see ya, he stands ahint 
our wo', he leuks out o' t' windows, an' shows his-sel through t' lattice. 

Westmorland (Rev. John Richardson). 

Chaftbb II. 

1. I 's t* rooa^ o* Sharon, an' t' lily o' t' Talleys. 

2. As t' lily amang t' thwoms, sooa *s my l&v amang t' dowght'rs. 

3. As t' apple-tree amang t' trees o' t' wood, sooa 's my beluVd 
amang t' s^s. I sat me doon {uid*r his shaddo* wi' gert plizzir, an' his 
f rewt was sweet to my teeast'. 


4. He fetcht me to t' feeastin'-hoose, an* his banner ower me was 

5. Prop me up wi' flagons, cumf rt me Tri' apples : for I *s siek o' 

6. His left hand is und'r my heead, an' his reeght hand coddles me. 

7. I cawtion ye, dowght'rs o* Jerewsalem, by t* roes, an* by t* 
hinds 0* t' fields, *at ye nowd*r stir up, nor weeal[*n my ll^y, while he 

8. T* voice o* my bel1iv*d ! loo* the*, he cu*8 lowpin* o* t^ fells, skel- 
pin* 0* t* hills. 

9. My beluv*d is like a roe, or a yung hart : loo* the*, he 8tan*s 
ahint oor wo*, he glimes oot at t* windo*B, shewin' hissel* through t* 

North Lancashire (James Phizackerley). 

Chaftbb n. 

1. I *m t' rose a Sharon, an t' lily a t' valleys. 

2. As t* lily amang t* thorns, sa&h iz me lov amang t* dowters. 

3. As t* apple-tree amang t* trees a t* wood, saah iz me beloVd 
amang t' sons. I saat down under hiz shada we graat delight, an hiz 
fruit was sweet ta me taast. 

4. He browt ma ta t* feastin house, an hiz banner ower ma was 

5. Stop ma we flagons, pleaz ma we apples : for I *m sick a love. 

6. Hiz left hand iz under me head, an hiz reight hand embraaces ma. 

7. I charge ye, ye dowters a Jeruslem, by t* raas, an t^ hinds a t' 
field, that ye stir nut up, nur awaak me lov, wal he pleaz. 

8. The voice a me beloVd ! Luke ya, he comes loupin on t* moun- 
tains, skippin on t* hills. 

9. Me belov'd iz like a raa or a young hart : luke ya, he stans 
behint owr woe, he lukes owt a t* windas, shewin hissel through t' 

South Lancashire^ parts about Bolton (James Taylor 


Chafteb IL 

1. Awm th* rose o* Shayron, un th* lily oth' valleys. 

2. As th' lily amung thums, so is ma love amung th* dowters. 

3. As th* appo-tree anmug th' trees oth* wood, ao is ma beloved 
amung th' sons. Aw keawrt deawn under his shadow wi* grei^t deleet, 
un his fruit wur sweet to my taste. 


4. Ha browt me to th' banquetin-heawse, un his banner o'er me 
wur love. 

6. Stay me wi' flagons, comfort me wi' appos : for awm sick o' love. 

6. His left hont is nnder my yed, un his reet hont clips me. 

7. Aw chezge joa, yoa dowters o' Jerusalem, by th' roes, un th* 
hoinds oth' fielt, that yoa stur not up, nor wakken ma love, tell he 

8. Th' yeighce o' ma beloved! lucko, he comes leopin uppo th' 
meawntins, skippin uppo th' hills. 

9. Ha beloVd is loike a roe, or a yung hert: lucko, ho stonds 
bebaind eawr waw, he gloors at th' windows, showin hissel through th' 

West Ridmg (Charles Bogers). 

Chaftbr II. 

1. Ah'm t' roas a' Sharon an' t' lily a' t' valleys. 

2. As f lily amang thorns, soa iz my luve amang t' dowters. 

8. As f apple-tree amang t^ trees a' t' wood soa iz my beluv'd amang 
t' sons. Ah sat dahn under hiz shada wi' greet deleet, an his frewt wor 
sweet ta ma taste. 

4. He bzowt ma ta t^ banquetin' hahce, an' hiz banner ower ma wor 


6. Stay ma wi' flagons, cnmfat ma wi' apples; for ah'm sick a' 

6. His left hand's under my head, an' hiz reight hand embraces ma. 

7. Ah charge ya, O yo dowters a' Jerusalem, by t' roes, an' by t' 
hinds a' t' fleld, 'at yo stur not up, nor w&ken my luve, till he pleaze. 

8. T* voice a' my beluVd I behowd he cumes laupin' upa' t' mahn- 
tans, skippin' upa t^ hills. 

9. My beluVd 's like a roe, or a young hart; behowd, he stands 
behint ahr wall, he looks foorth at t* windas, shewin' hizsen thro' t' 

Orcnmi (Henry Anthony Littledale). 

Ceafteb II. 

1. I is 't zooas o' Sharun, an' 't lilly o' 't gills. 

2. As 't lilly amang 't wicks, ewen soaa is mah luv amang 't 

8. As 't apple-tree amang 't trees o' 't wud, ewen sooa is mah luv 
amang 't ions. A sat mah daan unner as shadow wi' girt delaight, an 
as firewt wur sweeat to mah teast. 

4. A tarowght mah till 't banquetin'-heonse^ an' as flag ower mah 



5. Stay mah wi* pots, comfort mah wi' apples ; fur a is fair daan 
wi' luv. 

6. As leaft ban' is unner mah heead, an* as reet ban' cuddles mah. 

7. A charge yah, yah dowghters o' Jerusalem, by 't roes, an' by 
't binds o' 't field, 'at yah rog nut, nother wakken mah luy till that a 

8. T voice o' mah luv I sithah, a cums lopeing upo' 't fells, skipping 
upo' 't hills. 

9. Mah luv is laike until a roe, or a yung stag : sithah, a stanns 
ahint wir wa', a kecks foorth eouet o' 't winder, showin* hissel throwgh 
't casement. 

Sheffield (Abel Bywater). 

Chafteb II. 

1. O'm t' rooaz a' Sharon, an t* lilli a' t' valliz. 

2. As t' lilli amang thoams, sooa is mo luv amang t* dowters. 

3. As t' apple-tree amang a' trees a' t' wood, sooa is mo beluTved 
amang t' suns. sat dahn under his shaddo we gret deloight, an bis 
fruit wer sweet tummi tast. 

4. He browt ma to t' banquittin hahse, an bis banner ore ma wer 

5. Stay ma we flaggons, comfort ma we apples, for o 'm sick a' luv. 

6. His left hand 's under mo* heead, an his reit hand huddles ma. 

7. charge ya, ye dowters a* Jeruslem, be t* roes an be t* hoinds 
i' t* field, that yo stur not up nor wakken mo luv till he pleeaz. 

8. T* voice a* mo beluwed ! behold, he cometh lopin uppa t^ mahn- 
tins, skippin uppa t' bills. 

9. Mo beluwed *s loik a roe or a young hart : behold, he stani 
beheent ahr wall, he looks fooarth at t* winders, Bho*ln his-sen thzoo t* 

The plural in -8 of the Present Indicative, which 
Dr. Morris has chosen as the most convenient charac- 
teristic of the Northumbrian (where indeed the 8 is 
found, in the singular ais well), is an exception to the 
comparative unimportance of the remaining inflections 
of the northern dialects. It is still retained in some of 
them. The mixture of the two numbers, and the com- 
promise indicated by the use of the Auziliar and In- 
finitive, are shown in the following extracts. 


NoHhuwherland — Song of Solomon. 

Chaftbb I. 

3. It '8 a' be the fine smell o* thaw oilB» it thaw neam 's like oil 
teem'd oot, an' for this the lasses luves the'. — Bobsan, 

Ckaftkb VIII. 

13. Thoo thit lecres i' the gardins, thaw freens lisaens te thaw talk ; 
let me bad heer 't I 

So it is in the Newcastle sub-dialect — the maidvns 
luves the^ — the marrows Idsaena te thaw voice 

Also, in Central Cumberland — that 's what f 
lasses likes tha for — f cronies lissens to thy voice. — 

In Westmorland we find — f virgins luv the^ — as in 
the present English; also, in the other passage — 

In North Cumberland it is do love and lissan. In 
the North Biding, do and lizzen. 

In all the others it is do love and hearken. 

§ 104. Dialects of the Northumbrian of Scotland. 
— ^These are arranged by Dr. Murray as follows : — 

1. The Southern Group. — Simple and small; falling 
into varieties rather than sub-dialects. Spoken in the 
counties of Berwick, Boxburgh, Selkirk, Peebles, and 
Dumfries ; in Teviotdale, Tweeddale, Ettrickdale, An- 
nandale, and Eskdale; but changing in Nithsdale. 
This means that, so long as there is a frontier be- 
tween Scotland and England, they are spoken along, 
and indeed beyond, it; but that they cease where 
the division between the two kiugdoms is the Solway 
Firth. Neither is it spoken on the Lower Tweed; 
where the English county of Northumberland runs 
northward and comes in contact with the dialects 
of the next group. The parts about Coldstream and 


Kelso form the north-eastern boundary. On the west, 
however, where the Scotch runs southwards, it passes 
into the English of North Cumberland — changing in 
the central parts of the county. Here, in the eastern 
and middle districts, at least, the original language was 
British rather than Gaelic. 

2. The Centred Oroup. — Separated from the North- 
umbrian of Northumberland (or the Northumbrian of 
England) by the Lower Tweed. To this belongs the 
Merse (i.e. March) district. 

a. Haddington, Linlithgow, and Edinburgh, i.e. the 
Lothians. The literary language of the fifteenth and 
siKteenth centuries. Like the dialects of the southern 
coimties, it is spoken on ground originally British 
rather than Gaelic. Fife, on or within the Gtielic 
boimdary, is Lothian in dialect. 

6. Qiilloway and Carrick. Spoken on ground origin- 
ally British ; upon which Gaelic was subsequently intro- 
duced. The ethnology is further complicated by this 
having been the district in which the Picts for the last 
time are assigned in trustworthy history — Kirkcud- 
bright, Wigton, and part of Dumfriesshire. 

c. Clydesdale s= Ayr, Benfrew, and Lanarkshire, and 
part of Dumbartonshire, i.e. beyond the Clyde, and 
beyond the Northern Wall. Here, like the Lothian in 
Fife, it must be supposed to have encroached on the 
Gaelic frontier. 

The last divisions of this group lie wholly within 
the Gaelic, as opposed to the British, area. 

d. The Highland Border — western parts of Perth 
and Stirlingshire. For this see not only Pr. Murray's 
Map, but his Appendix on The Present Li/miis of the 
Gaelic vn Scotland — pp. 231-239. 

e. The Northr-eastem Oroup. — This £Edls into two 
divisions : — 


(o.) The SaiUhem. — ^Murray, Banff, Elgin, Aber- 
deenshire, Angus. 

(6.) The Northern. — Caithness; the intervening 
districts between the Murray Firth, and the parts 
between Lybster and Ubster (Scandinavian names) 
being classed with the purely Gkielic districts. Here 
there has been an intervening element, viz. the Scandi- 
navian or Norse. 

For Orkney and Shetland, in which there are no 
traces of the (Gaelic, the speech is English on a sub- 
stratum of Norse. The following is, I believe, the only 
specimen* of the NomSj or Norse, of Orkney and Shet- 

Fa Tor i ir i Chrimrie, Helleur ir i nam Uiite, gilla oosdum thite 
enmnia, yeja then moCa vara gort o jnm nnna goit i chimrie, ga vus 
d» on da dalight brow Tora, Firgive yub siima Tora sin vee firgiFe 
•indara mattra tub, Ijy vus ye i tomtation, min delivera vus fro olt 
lit, Amen. Or on sa meteteth vera. 

§ 105. Effect of Contact with the Originai Oaelic* 
— Dr. Murray has shown that, in the Phonesis, at least, 
this must not be overlooked. 

The prominent distinction of the north-eastern dialects is the use of 
/for idA, and of « for io, as in 'fat *$ vrang* for *wkat*9 wrong?* 
This peenliari^ is corrent £N>m Fentland Fiith to the Firth of Taj, 
and the dialect is most typically represented in Aberdeenshire^ and the 
district to the N.W. toward the Murray Firth (Dialect qf ih$ Southern 
CountUSt p, 237). See also p. 1 18 of this work. 

§ 106. Arudytio Character of the Northumbriam,. 
— ^The analytic character of the Northumbrian is less 
than that of the Westsaxon. We must remember, 
however, that its original Synthetic character was less 

* For the translation and interpretation, see Appendix. 




§ 107. The Mercian or MicUcmd Dialect. — ^The 
third of oiir main dialects is eminently deficient in 
positive characters ; so much so, that the answer to any 
question about the limits of its area would be to the 
efiect that they depended upon those of the Westfiaxon 
and Northumbrian dialects ; or that everything which 
could not be assigned to one of these two divisions was, 
on the principle of exclusion, Mercian or Midland — 
simply because there is no other place for it. However, 
with this indefinite character, much of the importance 
of the Mercian or Midland area is connected. It is 
the district wherein provincialism is at its TniniTniim, 

There is a rough way of forming an opinion upon this 
point. The literature of the dialects of the English 
language is considerable, and our provincial and local 
Grlossaries are numerous ; from which we may infer that 
where a county, or a group of counties, has no work 
upon its dialects, or only short ones, there is but little 
to be said about them. Now the counties for which 
we have this minimum of information are Middlesex, 
Herts, Buckinghamshire, Bedfordshire, Huntingdon- 
shire, and Butland ; and this is because, in these, the 
ordinary literary, written, or standard language of the 
island is spoken with comparative purity. Something 
abnormal is, of course, to be found in each ; but it 
amounts to very little in all. 

The same applies to Kent ; but in Kent we know 
that the dialect which the current English has super- 
seded was the Westsaxon ; this being not only more 
than what we know about the dialects north of the 


Thames, but also contrary to what we believe was the 
actual fact. 

In the Midland districts it is reasonably held that 
the spoken language of even the most uneducated ap- 
proaches the written language of the educated classes 
because it was originally the most like it; in other 
words, it was the dialect out of which the present 
literary English was developed. Nevertheless between 
the non-provincial English of a district, the mother 
dialect of the cultivated language of* the present 
time, and the English of one wherein the cultivated 
tongue has displaced a dialect of a different class, it 
is hard to decide. We can do so in the case of Kent 
and Surrey; partly from their geographical position, 
and more fiilly by special evidence as to the earlier 
forms of speech. But where the boundary is indefinite, 
and there are no records of the earlier speech, we can 
only come to approximate conclusions ; and it is need- 
less to say that the Mercian or Midland district is both 
irregular in outline and wide in extent. 

Northampton is the county which has the best claim 
to represent the Midland, or Mercian. It has long had 
the credit of giving us the best average English ; and, 
for some parts of it, not undeservedly. But like 
Buckinghamshire and Nottinghamshire it is a long 
county, and the dialect varies with its frontier. It is 
probable that, taking into consideration both its size 
and its outline, we should place Bedford, Huntingdon, 
and Hertfordshire somewhat higher. In Warwick- 
shire and Oxfordshire it is certain that anyone who 
looks closely and sharply for Westsaxon characteristics 
may find them; and that in respect to Norfolk, 
Suffolk, and Essex, a case may be made out for treating 
the dialects, as East Anglian, in a class by themselves. 

L 2 


This they may be. Their position, however, prevents 
them from being, like Warwickshire and Oxfordshire, 

§ 108. The West Mercian. — The sub-division of 
the Midland dialects, called the West Mercian, has a 
better claim to an independent rank. But it is pro- 
bably a transitional, ambiguous or equivalent group, 
with afl&nities on both sides — ^Northumbrian and West- 
saxon — rather than truly Mercian. South Worcester 
is about as far as we can trace the Westsaxon ; and 
North Lancashire about as faj* as we can trace the 
Northumbrian southwards and westwards. The division 
is recognised. Sometimes it is the Wyre, sometimes 
the Kibble ; the diflference being inconsiderable. On 
the Mercian side there is no boundary even so good as 
these. Mr. Gfumett held that the parts about Sheffield 
were Mercian ; and every Lancashire man knows that 
the famous work of Tim Bobbin (Collier) is only good 
for the parts about Bolton, Oldham, and Bury ; cer- 
tainly not for Fumess and Ribblesdale. This makes 
Shropshire, Cheshire, South Lancashire (whatever may 
be its boundary), Staffordshire, and North Derby, East 
Mercian — South Derby, Nottinghamshire, and Leicester 
being grouped with Northamptonshire ; which we have 
seen has a different aspect for each of its frontiers. 
What this most especially shows is the difficulty of de- 
termining classes by single characters, and with definite 
lines of demarcation. It must be by typie rather than 
definition that classes must be framed ; and ambiguous 
affinities, when two well-marked groups come into 
contact, must be the rule rather than the 'exception. 
Nevertheless, so long as the investigation is going on, 
single characters must be invested with an undue im- 
portance. There is no harm in this so long as each 
enquirer names the character he trusts to, and lets the 


oommon-flenBe of those who come after him detenniiie 
its value. 

That the dialects of the districts just enumerated 
are equally difficult to divide into two classes, or to 
assign, as a single class, to either the Westsaxon or the 
Northumbrian, is certain. But they are not Mercian 
in the way that South Lincolnshire and Huntingdon- 
shire, or even Norfolk and Suffolk are so. Certain, too, 
it is that, unlike the Westsaxon, the Northumbrian, 
and the Mercian proper, they are not represented by a 
literature of anything like national dimensions. 

During the times before the Conquest we know 
nothing about them. But this is the case with Mercia 
in mass. About the middle of the fourteenth century 
they appear for the first time. Dr. Morris takes as 
his leading character the personal signs of the Singular 
number of the Present tense which give Aope, opposed 
to the Northumbrian hopes ; the other two persons 
being Northumbrian. 

West Midland, Northern, 
First Person . . . hop0 hopM. 

Second ,, ... hope« hopM. 

Third „ ... hopM hope«. 

More important, however, is the statement that 
when the second and third persons vary their form, 
they take the southern (Westsaxon) forms -est, and 
-^h ; and that these forms in -6, -est, and ^eth^ are 
West Midland also. But this is not all. Like the 
Westsaxon, and unlike the Northumbrian, they use the 
plurals of he for their and them ; and prefix the ge 
(or its equivalent) to the past participle. Again, 
unlike the Northumbrian, but like the Westsaxon, they 
add -en to the plural of the preterit, as loved-en^^we^ 
ye^ they^ loved. This is found in poems ascribed to 
both Shropshire and Lancashire, i.e. the two extreme 

150 ^HOO^ AND '8HE.^ 

districts. On the other hand, the vowel of the present 
participle is a rather than -e or -i ; though the other 
forms are found. 

In comparing the East and West Mercian, the phy- 
sical outlines of our island must be borne in mind. 
Norfolk and Suffolk project into the sea, and have 
nothing but Mercia on the frontier. West Mercia is 
on the Welsh frontier, and to the north of the Dee, in 
that part of England where Mercia runs furthest west- 

§ 109. * Uoo ' and ' She.^ — The present leading char- 
acteristic of these dialects is the use of lioo for she. It 
is conspicuously present in the old and middle West- 
saxon. It is obsolete or obsolescent in the present 
provincial dialects which represent it; or those of 
Devon, Dorset, &c. 

The following are; (1) the districts in which Aoo 
certainly holds its ground at the present moment ; and 
(2) the districts of the frontier where ah^ prevails : — 



Farmer B. What did Misses Boord za or do to Hester, then ? 

Tummus L, Why, Hester may be wor summut to blame to ; for 
hoc wor on 'em, de ye zee, that jaVd Skimmerton, the mak gam that 
frunted zum o' the gentlefolk. 

Dialogue between Farmer Bennett and Thomas Lode, 

Otvd Sammy Twitcher^e Visit tu*t Gret Exibishun e Darby, 

It'll ne'er dow ta stey at whom wen iweryboddy els has bin tu't 
Exibishun. Or meens ta goo, sed ah ta mysen won neight, wen ah get 
whom aftnr a hard deys wok i't feelds. Soo ah meyd hup me moind ta 
goo i't mamin, an tae aar owd wummun wey me, az how rimembus 
t'fust Exibishun ther wor e Darby a monny yere sin, and kow thinks 
they conna bete that'n. » * * How went on till wee'd getten neer tu't 
plaise weer how thowt ta foind hit, but the/n poVd it aw daan u%, an's 
meyin a gronil new streight, wi sich foine bildins az ah ne'er seyd afoar. 
* * '^ At last wee get inter Hiron Yate, weer theer wor a lot moor 

«irOO' AND ^8HE.^ 151 

giond bildins, an wee Am a heatin haase kep be a xnon o't neym a Sim- 
mooB an theer wee get a gad tack aat, t'owd wammon hevin a kop a tee, 
as how Bed it wor moor re&eshin ta't inner mon. * * * * * 
Molly Bed how thowt if t'yang men an wimmin wor theer at t'saim 
toime theer wodna be mach wok gooin on. So ah Bed ah thowt t'men 
bilt it, an t'wimmin fan theer shair o't brass for't ; bat onj how it's a 
fbine peece a wok an woth gooin a loDg wej ta sey. Aftar wee'd seyn 
this, ih Bed, Nah, Molly, weel goo ta't Exibishan, an follerin a craad a 
fbakfl we Boan fan aarsens in front a't Bildin, wen ah sed, Naw, Molly, 
kom on — an went bowdly in an peyd me bob at fwhirlegig, an get had- 
mittered. Wen ah tanned raand far Molly how cadna get throw, how^t 
800 fat, an theer wor t'foaks lofftn at her. At last t'mon as towk 
f monny hoppened a side yate an let her in. 



A, Don yon know Bolden-moath Sammy? 

B. EeB, an' a neation good feller he is tew. 

A. A despat qaoiet mon ! bat he loves a sap o' drink. Ban yoa know 
his woif? 

B. Know her, ay. Hoda the yeiy devil when her spirit's ap. 

A. Hoo is. Hoo ases that mon sheamf al ; hoo rags him every neet 
o' her loif . 

B. Hoo does. Oive known her come into the pablic, and call him al* 
the names hoo conld lay her toDgae tew afore all the company. Hoo 
oaghts to stay till hoo*8 got him i* the boat, and then hoo mit say wha 
hoo*d a moind. Bat hoo taks aiter her feyther. 



So tightly hoadin on by th' yed, I hits th' owd mare a whop, 
Hoo plampe into the middle o' the wheatfield neck and crop ; 
An, when hoo fioandered oat on it, I catched another spin : 
And, misBOB, that's the cagion of the blood npo' my chin. 

A Day with the Cheshire Fox Doge, 


Eawr Marget declares had hoo cloas to pat on, 
Hodd go ap to Lannon ar* talk to th' great mon ; 
An' if things were na awtered when there hoo had been, 
Hod 8 fully resolved t' sew up meawth an' eend ; 

Hoo^e neawt to say again t' king, 

Bat hoo loikes a &ir thing, 
And hoo says hoo can tell when hoo* a hart 

The Oldham Weaver. 

152 <iroo' ASD 'ass.' 


And as hoo was restin one day in her rowxn, 
Boo spyd't the mon ridin th* mare intx> the town ; 
Then bounce go's her hart, and hoo war so gloppen, 
That out o' th' winder hoo*d like for to loppen. 

Hoo stampt and hoo stardt, and down th* stairs hoo run, 
Wi her hart in hur hondt, and hja wind welly gone ; 
Hur headgear flew ot£, and so did hur snowd, 
Hoo stampt and hoo stardt as if hoc^d been wod. 

WaiTikm Fair. 

8. We*n a little sister, un hoo' 8 beawt paps : wot mun we do foreawr 
sister ith' day when hoo 11 be spoken for? 

9. If ^ be a waw, well build on her a pallus o silver ; un if Aoo 
be a dur, we'll close hur in wi' seedar booarts. 

Th* Sung o' Solomon, ch. yiii., 8-9. — Lancashire (parts 
about Bolton),— J, T. Staton. 

In the South of Yorkshire and iiji the North of 
Lancashire we find ^ she.'' 

When yo goa ta meet Miss May (the month), mind an be aware or 
hur at t' vany furst seet, for shooaze az full ovher joakes, iyrery bit, as 
hur bruther April iz ; an glories if shoo can nobbat mack a May gedin 
OY onnyboddy. Still, shoo means no harm in it, it's a lively way sihoo 
hez, &c. 

T Baimsla Foaks* Annual^ #c.« 1856, pp. 10-11. 

8. Ween a little sister, an shoots nooa brests : wot shall wie do for 
dir sister i' tf day when shoo shall be spokken for? 

9. If shoo be a wall, weel bild on her a palace a' silyer ; and if skoo 
be a door, weel inclose her we booards a' cedar. 

T Song A' Solomon, viii., ^-^.Sheffidd {A, Bywater). 

8. Wee 'ye geet a laile sister, an' shu hesn't onny breeas : wativrer 
sail wee dew fur wir sister, i' 't day 'at shu '11 be sparred for? 

9. An shu be a waw, wee 11 big upov hir a pallis o' silver ; an' an 
shu be a dooar, wee '11 clooas hir up wi' booards o' cedar. 

*T Sang d Solomon, viii., S-d.— Craven {H. A. LUtledale). 

8. We have a lile sister, an shoo hez naa brusts : what shall wie dnt 
for our sister e tf day when shoo shall be spoken for? 

«irOO' AND ^8HE.^ 153 

•• If 9koo be a iroe, we'll build on her a palace a rilyer ; an if thoo 
ba a dfier, "veil fence her we bafiids a cedar. 

7* Sang A Solonum, viii., 8-9. — North Laneaahire, ue. 
Laneaskir$ North of the Wyrt ( 71 Phisaekerl^y 

But, besides this, the form in A^ is a scarce one any- 
where ; in other words, the nominatiye feminine of he 
(as a word) is limited to two groups (and to two only) 
of the German class of languages — ^viz., the Anglo^ 
saxon and the Frisian. In the latter we find heo in the 
old East Frisian and in the present North Frisian ; 
whilst in the Middle Frisian of the present Dutch pro- 
vince the word is she. 

Ne se dat hia et eeld habbe jef seth, jef wixled trach dera tria hand- 
seda eer, deer Ho die kindee dee levee mede hulp. See page 65, linee 1 
and 29. 

' Ofke' Mt eei, ' elk jier in bem/ 

* Of ke/ she said, ' each year a bairn.' 

Ju feed l£in Seen, fortiine wat. 

She said, ' Mine eon, earn somewhat' 

Jn noodight horn en sin hinghst in. 
She forced him and his horse in. 

Meanwhile — 

In Old Saxon the nom. fern, is sva, ; the plural sia^ 
9id, siiL 

In Old High G-erman, aiu ; plural, aii^ aid, siu. 

In the present German, fern., sie ; plural, sie. 

In MoBsogothic, nom. fem., si. 

It is found, however, in the Northumbrian ; i.e. that 
of the G-losses. 

But the form hoo or heo does not stand by itself. Its 
use, or disuse, involves that of the Feminine Definite 
Article, which is in Westsaxon 86=^6; seo (sA6)=i7= J?CBt 
{that)^To : the demonstrative pronoun proper, and the 
pronoun of the third person (which is much the same), 
being he, heOj hit s it. There is, then, a mixture of 

154 ^HOO^ AND ^8HE.^ 

two fundamental words, when we look to the demon- 
strative and personal pronoun alone, and of three wh^tt 
we take in the article. For the article, however, mas- 
culine and feminine, the root a- is the oldest form, Le. 
it is the form in Moesogothic, Icelandic, and Anglo- '-. 
saxon. If it does not exclude the masculine and femi 
nine of that (i.e. the inflections of the root th = J?), it 
preponderates. The Moesogothic we know in its oldest 
stage only ; but in Anglosaxon and Norse it disappears 
early. In Frisian and in the Modem German it is 
superseded by the root th- (thju, die). In Westsaxon, 
however, it is displaced without taking a substitute; 
i.e. )>e serves for all the three genders ; as it does now. 
When seo is thus (so to say) liberated from its function 
as a definite article, it displaces heOj the feminine of 
the personal pronoun. Hence, heo, or hooj seems to 
hold its ground only so long as either seo or theo (thiu, 
theo) are not feminine demonstratives (definite articles), 
or until the common form J?e (the) has superseded them 
both. Se drops out altogether, at an early period. In 
the Northumbrian neither is found from first to last. 

This applies to the value of heo^ or hoo, as a char- 
acteristic form ; showing that it stands for something 
more than itself. The application of the bearing of 
the correlation is general. Its exact history, however, 
in the present case cannot be given in detail. But this 
is for want of materials. All we can say is that if, in 
the dialects of the above-named districts, hoo wholly 
exclude she as the feminine of the third person, the 
latter word has fallen out of the language altogether ; 
for it has not yet been found as a definite article. IVIore 
than this, in the known specimens of the West Mid- 
land dialects in their older stages, she and hoo do not 

In the truly Mercian English she is, to say the 

AnmnnES of thb mbbgian. 155 

least, a commoner fonn than heo. It has wholly super- 
seded heo, and survives «e, which is wholly lost. 

AU that can be said about the use of the word hoo 
in StaflFordshire, &o., is that it points in the direction 
of Wessex rather than in that of Northumbria. 

§ 110. Preponderatmg Ajffmitie^ of the Mercian. 
— ^This use of hoo for she points, as we have already 
said, to the Westsaxon ; but it only does so in the first 
instance— only when we compare the Mercian with the 
Northumbrian of the Middle period. In the oldest 
Northimibrianwe find heo; nor must we fail to remem- 
ber that, in the present Westsaxon, it is obsolescent. 

In respect to its characters in the way of name and 
geographical area, the external evidence, though of less 
value than that of language, deserves notice. Mercia^ 
as a name, is an indifierent one ; i.e. it points neither 
to Saxon Wessex nor to English Northumberland ; for it 
is a geographical rather than an ethnological term, and, 
so far as it characterizes a population, means nothing. 
But it is not a continuous one. On the contrary, for 
the districts south of the Humber, and south even of the 
Ouse, the names East-Engle and Middel-Engle appear 
in the Anglosaxon Chronicle, and that as translations of 
the Orientales AngU, and Mediterranei Angli of Beda ; 
specially connected in origin with the Mercians, with 
the Northumbrians, and with the Angle denomination 
in general. 

De Anglifl * * Orientales Angli, Mediterranei Angli, Meieii, et 
tota Northumbroram progenies. — Beda, Hist, Ecd. i. xv. 86. 

Of Angle comon * * EkaUEngle, Middel Bhigle, Mearce, and 
ealle Northjmbra. — A. S. Chron., a.d. 499. 

It is safe, then, to say that the evidence of Beda, 
who specially gives us the distribution of the conquer- 
ing Germans, makes Mercia Angle rather than Saxon. 


And it is equally safe to say that, in Grennany, we 
find no district so definitely assigned to the men of 
Mercia, as Westphalia is to the Saxons, and the Lower 
Elbe to the Angles. 

This is as much as can well be said at present. Nor 
is the question one that presses; for whether the 
Mercian be modified Angle or modified Saxon, an in- 
dependent dialect or a mixed one, is, probably, inca- 
pable of being positively either affirmed or denied. 
Still, it belongs to a large district, and if we call it 
mixed, something more than the mere influence of a 
dialect on its frontier is required. 

§ 111. Of the analytic character of the Mercian we 
can only repeat what was said about the Northumbrian. 
If few old inflections have been replaced by analytic 
forms, it is because they were, comparatively, but few 
to begin with. StiU there has been change. 



§ 112. Between the Weataaocon character of the 
Heliand, and the Essex and Frekkenhorst specimens 
from the parts about Miinster in Westphalia, we got, 
from the evidence of the language, an approximate 
locality for the OWsaxon of Grermany as compared with 
the -AngrZosaxon of Wessex; but without any corre- 
sponding historical indications. 

For the parts about Altmark we get an incomplete 
series of historical notices of the approximate loodity 


in Germany of the mother-country of the Angle de- 
nomination in England ; but without any correspond- 
ing specimens of the language. Nor are the later 
provincial dialects sufficiently characteristic to make up 
for the deficiency. 

Still, for two definite and distant points in England 
we have got two definite and distant points in Grermany ; 
though the evidence of their correspondence is not of a 
uniform character. 

And in Germany, as in England, we find a third 
district in which we find no correspondence with the 
midland parts of England sufficiently definite to enable 
us, either from internal or external evidence, to assign 
to it the third division of our dialects. 

The distinction, then (or dualism, if we choose to 
call it so), between the Angle and Saxon element in 
England is real (and not nominal) in both countries. 

But the evidence of it is difierent. On the Saxon 
side it is both more direct than on the Angle, and there 
is much more of it. On the Angle side it is wholly a 
matter of inference. 

In the following extracts we get a language of which 
the very least that can be said is that it is as like the 
Oldsaxon of Westphalia as the dialects of Wilts, Dorset, 
Somerset, and Devon are like the Westsaxon ; and it 
may be seen, if we note the localities, that some of them 
lie £Eur beyond the boundaries of Westphalia. It is in 
the plural of substantives in -8 and the plural of verbs 
in -4 ( ss th) that they most decidedly disagree with the 
German. They are italicized accordingly. 

Parts about Eitm. 

Tnek, tuck, tnck, mien Hihneken, 
Wnlt deiste in mienan Hoff ? 
Flndu mi alle BlanmkM 9ft, 
Dat mlk to vol te grofil 


Tuck, tuck, my chicken, 
What dost thou in my yard ? 
Fluckest (for) me all flowers ofl^ 
That dost thou much too rough. 

Dital of the Pertonal JVonotin. 

Frau, frau wat spinn i so flietig ? Dame 1 dame ! what spin yon lo ' 

busy ? 

For miene Mann 'n golden Kink. For my husband a golden ring. 

Wo ess u Mann ? Where is your husband ? 

Inne Schiiiir. In the bam. 

Wat dat ha do ? What does he there? 

Eck segg et ink nich. I won*t tell you. 

segget het mi all. tell us all. 

Ha is op da Schiiiir un fourt da He is in the bam and fothers two 

Kiiiiskes. cows. 

Git mogget sa mi awer jou nich You may now not hunt me. 


Part* about Frekkmhorst, — I%e Pr^ of Past ParOeiple dropped. 

Laiw Haar, laiw Haar, so blite* doch &8 ! 
Jans Schr6kamp was ut 't W&atshus kyuemen. 
Wo he all nacht satt bfts te lasz, 
He harre IDjoarst Qoer fiif of sasz 
Auk woll en Halfken to yjiel f\^'uetnen. 

* Dear Lord ! Dear Lord I how it lightens ! ' 

Jack Schrokamp was come from the inn ; 

Where he all night sat till the last ; 

He had thirst for five or six. 

But he would take a half-glass too much. 

Parte about Warendorf {near Frekkenhoret). 

Sii de tied hawwe^ fiUe nachtegallen twee augen, un blinnenlangen 
ki^nne augen. 

Since that time have all nightingales two eyes, and blindworms no 

Dialeet of Oenaburgh, 

Dar ginten, dar kiket de Strauten henup, 
Dar stahe/ wat aule Wywer in 'n Tropp ; 
De Annke, de Hildke, de Geske, de Siltke, 
De Trintke, de Xultke, de Elsbeen, de Tiultke ; 
Wann de sick entmo^^, dat schnaatert sau fohr 
liefhaftig as wenn*t in 'n Gausestall w5r. 


There yonder, there look np the street, 

There stand the old women in a troop ; 

The Annke,* the Hildke, the Geske, the Siltke, 

The Trintke, the Aultke, the Elsbeen, the Taultke. 

When they meetf each other, it cackles so sore, 

Laughable (?) as If it were in a goose^talL 

Paris about JHunster, 

Vat kiek< as de Stamkes so firondlich an ? 
O saih, wu se spieled on lachel/ us an ! 

Why look the stars so friendly on ? 
O see, how they play and laugh on us. 

Aowens wen ick in min Bettken tri&de 
Triiid ick in Maria's Schaut 
Twi&lf Engelkea gaoh< met mi. 
Twee Engelkeff an den Kopp-End, 
Twee Engelketf an den Foten-Endy 
Twee de mi mi decked, 
Twee de mi wecket. 

Eyening's, when I in my bed step (tread). 

Step I in Maiys bosom ; 

Twelf Angels go with me. 

Two Angels on the head-end, 

Two Angels on the foot-end, 

Two that oorer (deck) me, 

Two that wake me. 

Town of Otnaimrgk, 

Een'n Ossen willt ni ror.Di fohren, 

Dat siilTst Du siist wo groot sa sind : 
Bock kann sick saken et geboren, 

Dat man se noch t&I groter find. 

An ox will we before thee bring, 
That self thou seest how big they are ; 

* Annie, Hilda, Jessie, SibyU, Catherine, (?) Elisabeth, 

Adelaide. f As in ftdl mtm^mmok. 



Still, it may, perhaps, happen 
That one may find them *8till bigger. 


Ic ireet wol, ick weet wol, wo goot wahnan is ; 
To floUwege, to Hollvege, wenn't sommer is. 
De Halstrapperx, de hewwe^ de fatten Swien ; 
De Moorborger«, de driew^ se henin ; 
De Halsbecker he wet de hogen Schoh ; 
De Eggeloger snored se to, &c 

The poem runs on in similar couplets ; giving the 
characteristics of the dififerent villages. This calls for 
a free use of the plural, so that within the remaining 
stanzas we find as many as seven of them — et% h&wwt 
(twice), gaM^ stoM (twice), stickty geiht, streiht, 


Dat is te Banter Earkhof ; 

De liggt buten dieks up d'Gxoo ; 
De Taten de roop^, un d*Seekobb krit^, 

De Dooden de hoor^ to. 

That is the Banter churchyard ; 

That lies out up in the deep ; 
The sand-pipers cry, and the sea-mews shriek. 

They belong to the dead. 

Dialect of Butjahde, In EmglUk, 

Hee schuU by siens glyken blyren ; He should remain with his equals; 

Wy kahm< also wyt as hee ; We have oome as fitr as he : 

Ick kann lesen, reknen, schrieven : I can read, reckon, write, 

Dat is nok woU gar Tar dree. That is enough lor three. 

Fartt about Vechta, 

Jk stah nech up, late di der nech in, 
Bett datt mine Oolen na*n Bedde sunt. 
Chih du nu hen in den gronen Wald, 
Denn mine Oolen schlape^ boUe? 

* Tot tnel(? weU^wohl). 


7%e aams in the Frisian of Saterland, 

Jhk stoende nit ap, lete di dir nit in, 
Bett dett min Oolden etter Bedde sunt. 
Gkmnge da nu font in den grenen Wold, 
Denn mine Oolden schlepe bald. 

I stand not np, let thee there not in, 
Till that mj parents after bed be ; 
€k> now forth in the green wood, 
For my parents sleep soon. 

German. Frisian, 

Ick un min Kamerad, Ihk un min Kamerad, 

Wy beyde, wy sint Soldat ; Wi be, wi siint Soldat ; 

Wy gah< morgen weg. Wi gounge meden font. 

I and my comrade, 

We both, we be soldiers ; 

We go, to-morrow, away. 

The Valley of the DiemeL {Here Saxonia is divi' 
dedfrom Hesse.) 

De WuorpelMren, 


Se had dre grante Stene utehdgget, osse de Wuorpel sie^, un had 
se se eliegt up, de iingerste Miire vannen Th&ren, un damp sie^ 
ewiest to seene achtein Augen. De alien Liie, de nau liewe^ hod den 
Th&ren, on de Wuorpele, de damp woren nau eseen, un daaran heed de 
Th&ren eheiten : de Wiiorpelth&ren. 

They had three great stones cut out as if they were dice, and had 
them laid upon the topmost wall of the tower, and there are to be seen 
there eighteen eyes. De old people, who now are aliyo, had now seen 
the tower and the dice which were on it, and, thence, had called the 
tower Wuorpeltharen. 

Da sie< ree de Buffun, do Staugcn, de Prangen ; 
Se komme^ und willt de Schandarmen uphangen. 
Se stah/ inn 'em Glieddo, de Schoten im arm, 
Dat jie< 'ne Geskichte, dat Good siek orbarm. 

There are ready the clubs, the poles, the forks ; 
They come and will hang-up the Gendarmes. 
They stand in a row, the guns in arm ; 
There gives a stoiy, God hare mercy. 




ParU about Bieltfeid, 

Sunne Martin, hilges Mann 
Dei us wat vertellen kann. 
V&n Appeln un van Biern, 
Dei Niote faUt van der Miern. 
Sie/ sou gout un giewet us wat? 
lAt 't us nech to lange stan ! 
Wi miot^ n4 'n Husken fodder g&n 
Van hier batt na Kaolen ; 
D& miot^ wi auk krajolen, 
Un Kaolen es n& fetren. 

Saint Martin, holy man ; 

Who us (8ome)what tell can ; 

Of apples and of pears — 

The nuts fall from the walls. 

Be so good and give us (some)what. 

Let us not too long stand ; 

We must back to house a-foot fp 

From here to Cologne ; 

There must we also carol, 

And Cologne is still fSeir. 

Parts about HUdesheim, 

Wi Kome^ woU vor eines rikcn Manns Door 

Tau diissen Marten-Abend ! 
Wi wunsche^ dem Heeren einen goldenen Disch; 
Wi wiinsche^ der Fruen 'n goldenen Wagon. 
Tau diissen Marten- Abend ! 

We come well before a rich man's door, 

To (at) this (St.) Martin's eve. 
We wish to the master a golden dish. 
We Vish to the mistress a golden carriage. 
For this Martin's eve. 

Parts about Grubenhage* 
Diene Aagon sint brunn un kralle, 

Und du weisst et wot nich, mien kind I 
Dat se gluue Fnnke scheitet 

Int harte boase Kind. 

Thine eyes are brown and lively, 
And thou knowest it not well, my child I 

That they glowing sparks shoot ; 
Thou hard, wicked child ! 


Parts ahoxU Minden (Jnffrarian), 

Up den Bargen, up der An, 

Blaihe/ Blaumen helle, 
Un de Haven, klor nn blau, 

Farvt de Angerquelle. 

Up the hill, up the meadow, 

Blow bright flowers. 
And the heaven, clear and bine. 

Colours the Anger springs. 

Parts about Bintdn (Angrarian), 

Wi kohn< et nich licven ; 
Wi hebbe^ schon Haren, 
Dei moh^ wi rorehron. 
Wi kohn^ nich verdragen 
Da du us wutt fegen. 

We cannot bear it ; 
We have already masters. 
That we must honour. 
We cannot tolerate 
That thou wilt sweep us. 

Such are the dialects and sub-dialects which most 
especially give us the characteristic -t as the sign of 
the Plural Number. Any other Anglosaxon character- 
istic would have given like results ; but the Plural -t is 
the beet.- After this, perhaps, the absence of the final 
-r in wCj he, &c., where the High German has wir, er^ 
&0. The plural in -8 is not so important, inasmuch as, 
though absent in the literary German, it is, along with 
-671, the ordinary Plural in Dutch. 

All the extracts are taken from Firmenich {Go^ 
maniens Volkerstimme). 

§ 113. The Analytic or Synthetic Character of the 
Eocistvng Mepreaentativea of the Old Saxon, — ^That 
the dialects of the German in Britain changed more 


rapidly than those in Grermany is well known ; and it 
is, also, known that the present Grerman, so far as its 
inflections go, is, at least, on a level with the oldest 
Westsaxon. To this we may add that what applies 
to the literary languages of both Grermany and the 
Netherlands applies to the provincial dialects as well. 
Even among the scanty specimens of the present 
chapter we find in the provincial Westphalian what we 
fail to find in the cultivated language — ^viz., the Dual 
of the Personal Pronoun. 



§ 114. Indefinite and Negative Character of the 
Mercian. — The indefinite and negative character of the 
Mercian, as compared with that of either the West- 
saxon or the Northumbrian, has commanded our atten- 
tion. To some extent, it is nothing more than what we 
expect from its place on the map of England. Two 
extreme dialects, as a matter of course, are more easily 
distinguished from one another than either of them is 
distinguished from an intermediate form of speech. 
Hence, we find nothing in Germany which corresponds 
with the Mercian as the Westphalian corresponds with 
the Westsaxon. The correspondence between the 
Northumbrian and the probable dialects of the Lower 
Elbe is less direct. But even for the Old Angle of tho 
Continent, as the parent tongue of the Northumbriar, 
we can make out a much stronger case than we can for 


any third form of speech in Crermany having been the 
parent of the Mercian ; and, as the words Mercian and 
Midland are geographical rather than ethnological or 
national terms, this is nothing more than what we 

§ 115. Frisians of Procopius. — In Procopius the 
three nations of Britain are (1) the native Britons ; (2) 
the Frisians ; and (3) Angles. 

What we have to notice on this point is not so much 
the presence of the name * Frisian ' as the absence of 
the name * Saxon.^ The preference of the one to the 
other is, probably, referable to the mixed character of 
the Embassy ; which, when we go into the details of its 
composition, is partly Frank, partly Angle. The am- 
bassadors of the Frank king were, as their master, 
Franks ; but there were sent with them certain Angles 
(presumptively of the Elbe) in order that the Frank 
king might pass with the Emperor as a ruler over tlie 
Angles of Britain. What basis there may have been 
for the claim does not here interest us. What seems 
likely, however, is this — that it was not from the Angle 
part of the Embassy that the word Frisian reached Pro- 
copius ; for the Angles, if our view of the origin of the 
name be accurate, would have applied Saxons not only 
to the Saxons, but, probably, to the- Frisians as well ; 
whereas, the Franks are likely not only to have called 
the Frisians by their old name, but to have extended it 
to the Saxons ; for we must remember that, though the 
time when the name ^ Saxon ' is first met with as 
applied to the occupants of Northern Grermany is ap- 
proaching, it has not actually arrived. 

§ 116. Ooths of Procopius. — The same unwilling- 
ness on the part of the ordinary historians to impugn 
the authority of Beda, which has shown itself so con- 
spicuously in their neglect of the notice of Pros^c 


Tiro, shows itself a second time (as it shows itself over 
and over again) in their neglect of an important notice 
of Groths in connection with Britain, by Procopius. In 
his History of the Gothic War he gives us a conference 
between certain Gothic legates and Belisariiis. The 
former make a merit of having made over to the 
Romans the valuable island of Sicily. To this Beli- 
sarius replies that the Bomans, on their part, had made 
over to them the larger island of Britain. Nothing is 
more unlikely than that this answer should not have 
been given ; though Procopius is a cotemporary witness 
for the conference only. The cession must have been 
made earlier : nor is the approximate date difficult to 
make out. It must have been when the Goths were at 
the height of their power in Gaul, and before the rise of 
the Franks : a date which comes very close to the times 
of Hengist, Vortigem, and Vortimer, i.e. the middle of 
the Fifth* Century. 

§ 117. Banes of Proc(ypiu8. — Procopius is the first 
writer who mentions the Danes ; and he mentions them 
in connection with the Heruli and the Wami. This, 
along with the accoimt of Jomandes, has already been 
noticed. So have the kings of the Wami and the 
relations between the Wami and the Angles. So, too, 
has an association of the Heruli with the Saxons of 

Procopius's is the first notice of the Danes. The 
next is that of Gregory of Tours ; but it is only 

* This alone is held to stand good against the authority of Beda ; 
whose Jutc8 aro deduced from Jutlarid. The influence of either the 
Jutes of Bcda or the Goths of Procopius on our language is so insignifi- 
cant that no more is here said about them. Other reasons, however, in 
favour of the present view, may bo found in my larger work, * The Eng^ 
lish Language^ p. 161-165 (Edit. 1862). For another incidental 
remark upon the confusion of the names Goth and Jute (of Jotlaod) 
see note on next section. 


because Gregory is the later writer that Procopius takes 
precedence of him as an authority. As such, he is 
earlier by about forty years. But the death of Chochi- 
laicus, which is related by the Frank historian as 
having taken place after a defeat in the Netherlands, is 
assigned to the year 516 ; not too early, however, for 
the time of Theodebert, who, during the lifetime of his 
father Theodoric (Thierry), defeated the Danes. The 
third notice of the Danes is in the ^ Anglosaxon 
Chronicle,' a.d. 787. 

That these were the^rs^ Danes that invaded Eng- 
land is expressly stated in the notices referred to ; far 
more so than it is in any part of Beda referring to the 
Saxons as being the first of their denomination. At 
present, however, it i^ not interpreted so strictly ; in- 
deed, it is probable that the most influential authori- 
ties admit the likelihood of there having been Danes 
in England as soon as there were Angles : and this 
without counting the Norwegians of Scotland.* 

§ 118. Saocony, Heaae, and Thuringia. — Saxony^ 
as compared with the other two, is a new name ; 
and, at first, it is an ethnological, rather than a geo- 
graphical, one. When it becomes geographical it 
is so indefinite as to lose its import in ethnology. All 
that here need be done with it is to indicate the extent 
of the area within which the philological characters 

* This by no means militates against tho doctrine that the Jutes of 
Beda were Goth$ rather than Jutlanders. In tho I>ttor of Venantius 
we find the words Geta and Euthio in tho samo line ; from which we 
maj infer that they apply to different populations ; and as Gcta meant 
the Gcth^ Euthio meant tho Jute. Moreover tho name Danm is associ- 
ated with them. All, liowevor, that comes from this is the fact that 
the ziamee Bant and Jute were known to tho Franks of the sixth centur}% 
and that an indefinite claim of supremacy over them was asserted. No- 
thing 18 more likely than this ; for wo havo seen Theodebert affected 
a similar authority in England. But there is nothing in the two terms 
that soiictions the notion of Jutlanders in Kent 


of the Saxon, as a form of speech, present them- 
selves. And here we must introduce a new £stctor, viz., 
the letter -r as the sign of certain cases of the pronoun. 
It characterises the present Literary Grerman; where 
mr=we. The older. Moesogothic gives us -a-^vew, of 
which the German wir and the Icelandic ver are later 
forms. The importance of the change will soon show 

Between the verbs in -^A, and the pronouns in -« or 
-^ (i.e. without the -r), we trace, in the present provin- 
cial dialects of Grermany, signs of Saxonism as far as 
Waldeck, and the parts about Weimar, Erfurt, Gotha, 
and Eudolstadt, in Thuringian Saxony ; a name which 
indicates a borderland, and that on the side of both 
Thuringia and Hesse. ^ 

On the west we find them as far as the Angrarian 
frontier, and on the coast as far as the Jahde (Butjahde) 
and the paits beyond it, i.e. the narrow angle between 
the mouths of the Weser and the Elbe, where the 
Frisian ends ; reappearing, however, on the north side 
of the Elbe, and being continuous on the islands. 

For the northern frontier of Hesse we find one defi- 
nite boundary, but (in my mind) only a political one, 
viz., the Pagus Hessi Saxonicua^ and the PaguaHeasi 
Frandcus. This, along with the present dialect, makes 
Waldeck Saxon. But in Northern, and to a less extent 
in Central Hesse, we find Saxon characteristics. Along 
the Ehine the Old Saxon changes character till, in the 
Alsatian of the Krist, we get a preponderance of High 
German characters — characters, however, which are 
nearly of one kind, i.e., the change from d to tjb to pj 
<7 to i, and t to z. The distinction in these districts 
between Saxon and Frank has been treated as political 
rather than ethnological (see § 42). That between 
Saxon and Alemannic is more decidedly ethnologplcaL 


Hesse is by no means a district with a special dia- 
lect of its own; but one which shows Saxon, Ale- 
mannic, and Thpringian characters according to the 

Thuringia, on the other hand, has as definite a 
Thuringian form of speech (dialect or language, as the 
case may be) as any in Germany. 

§ 119. Dialect of the District of Anglen. — The 
only two specimens I have seen of the district of 
Anglen, which Beda especially assigns to the Angles, 
have nothing that specially points to either the Saxon 
or the Angle of England. They are the ordinary Piatt 
Deutsch of Northern Germany, witli older Danish ele- 

§ 120. The Angle of the Continent — Wliere must 
we look for i^f — I submit that it must be looked for in 
Denmark; not, however, within the boundaries of 
the present kingdom so called, nor yet within the king- 
doms of either Norway or Sweden, but rather in the 
district from which both the German that became the 
language of Central Britain, and the language that is 
known by the name of Norse, or Scandinavian, origin- 
ated. The particular time at which the two languages 
were suflSciently alike one another to pass for the same, 
or for closely allied dialects of a common mother- 
tongue, is not determined ; though it is believed that 
imtil after the eighth century the two forms of speech 
were mutually intelligible, if not over the whole of 
their respective areas, at least in Britain, and in the 
parts between the Elbe and the Eyder. Such a form 
of speech must have been sufficiently unlike the Saxon 
of Westphalia and the Westsaxon of Southern Britain 
to account for the acknowledged differences between the 
Westsaxon and the Northiunbrian, and, at the same 
time, sufficiently like it to have left the Saxon and 


Angle forms of speech in Britain as two diflferent varie- 
ties of one and the same language rather than as two 
mutually imintelligible languages ; ii^ other words, to 
have left them as they are represented in the North- 
umbrian Glosses and the more regular compositions of 
the Westsaxon literature. 

The geographical relations of the district that has 
been assigned to the Angles of Germany are the basis 
of this view. Of their language we have no specimens ; 
but if it can be shown that the Danish of the parts 
north of the Angle area agrees in the necessary char- 
acters with the German on the south, the result is a 
presumption, at the very least, in favour of the Angle 
having belonged to the same class. This means that 
the character of the Angle, which cannot be determined 
by actual specimens from the soil of Germany, may be, 
in the first instance, presumed from that of the lan- 
guages of its northern and southern frontiers — pro- 
vided, of course, that there are no conflicting reasons 
in favour of connecting it with the languages, or 
dialects, of either the West or East. Concerning the 
West we may say that, though German, it is other than 
Saxon, for the Saxon characteristics extend but a short 
way into Ostphalia. On thB east the frontier is not 
even German ; for when we cross the Elbe the whole 
language is Slavonic. 

That the direction of the Non-Saxon dialects ran 
from south to north rather than from west to east, that 
it ran in approximate parallelism with the Saale and 
Elbe rather than across the head-waters of the Weser, 
was stated in a previous chapter. But, within the area 
then under consideration, no specimens of the language 
were brought in. This was because, for the middle 
districts, there were none, of adequate antiquity, pro- 
ducible. And this, again, was because we limited our- 


selves to the earlier periods of the Christian era in 
place, and to the date (or a moderate approximation to 
it) of the Old Saxon remains in time. The Danes were 
only named as a people ; a people without any defi- 
nitely assigned language or locality. When the Danish 
language, however, comes under consideration, the 
horizon enlarges itself ; and to this change of condition 
we now advert; for the Danish (or Norse) is now 
brought in from the north, and two other forms of 
speech from the south; so that when we find the 
Danish language on the north (as far north as Iceland 
and as late in time as the present century) and the 
German of Western Thuringiaand South-eastern Hesse 
agreeing with one another in certain points wherfein 
they differ from the Saxon, the same diflference (though 
to a less extent) being found in the Westsaxon and 
Northumbrian of Britain, the prima facie evidence 
of the Norse and Thuringian affinities of the Middle 
district speaks for itself. Unless then, there are reasons 
for the contrary, the intervening district agrees in cha- 
racter with that of parts beyond it, and between which 
it lies. 

H 121. Such 18 the main reason for looking to Donmark, or tho 
Danish language, in tho first instance. What wc find doponds upon its 
relations to the languages of tho Southern extremity. But there is a 
minor point which deserves notice. The Frisian is tho language which 
is generally referred to in the first instance when the differences between 
the Westsaxon and the Northumbrian are inyestigatc<l. This is because 
the Frisians are generally considered to have been the earlier settlers. 
It is not, however, so much a question of dato as one of likeness and 
diiRrrence between the three forms of speech. 

But there are reasons why tho question is important. If, in 
addition to supposing that tho Frisians were cither Saxons under 
another name, or an allied population that took part in the invasions of 
the fifth century, we, also, hold that tho Danes were slrangers to Britain 
until the eighth, it is clear that the characters of the earliest Northum- 
brian specimens, when they are other than Westsaxon, must 1>o Frisian 
xathMT than Norse ; and that criticism of this character has been a{)pUcd 


to the * Psalter' we have already stited (§ 98). The doctrine that the 
Norse is as old as the Saxon, of course, leads to nothing of the kind ; 
but it is not the prevailing one. This, then, is one of the circumstances 
that invest the Frisian with somewhat more importance than is univer- 
saUy admitted ; in other words, the Frisian owes its position to the acci- 
dent of its date rather than to its own intrinsic claims ; and to these 
its prerogative over the Norse, rather than to anj abnormal oversight 
on the part of English investigators, has to be ascribed. The Frisian 
was sufficiently (and more than sufficiently) like the Westsaxon to pass 
for a mutually intelligible form of speech ; and, as it bore a separate 
name, it was sufficiently unlike to pass for a second factor in the consi- 
deration of the differences between our dialects. Moreover, where it 
diffi)red with the Westsaxon, it agreed, to a certain extent, with the 
Northumbrian. It does this, most especially, when it gives us the 
termination -a for -an in the infinitive mood, as b<Bnui » baman ■> 

It must be remembered, however, that the Frisian and Westsaxon 
records that give us this difference are, by no means, contemporaneous ; 
indeed they belong to different stages of the two languages. The West- 
saxon that forms its infinitives in -an is the Westsaxon of the ninth, 
tenth, and eleventh centuries. During the middle period of its history 
the -w disappears. 

Now it is with the Westsaxon of the middle period that the oldest 
specimens of the Frisian coincide in date ; so that, although, as com- 
pared with the later forms of speech, the Frisian of the Asega-bog, &c., 
is called Old Frisian, it is anything but old after the manner of the 
Old Westsaxon. On the contrary, so far as date goes, the Old Frisien 
is the parallel of the Middle Westsaxon ; and with this, it agrees rather 
than differs ; for in the fourteenth century both languages (or dialects) 
are without the final -n of the infinitive. This greatly abates the sup- 
posed difierence ; indeed, when we take date for date, we have no evi- 
dence that, in the time of the Westsaxon literature and the Northum- 
brian Glosses, the -n was obsolete in the Frisian. 

§ 122. Mceaogothic and Old Norae, — The Moeso- 
gothic is the oldest of any of the German languages 
both in date and in situation ; for the translation of the 
Gospels by which it is best represented is as old as the 
last quarter of the fourth century. In respect to its 
inflections, it has nearly all that are found in all the 
other German languages put together ; and it has them 
in a fuller form, and in an older phonesis, especially in 


the use of -a for -r. Indeed, the Mcesogothic may be 
said to be characterised by its Sigmatism. 

The Old Norse, in respect to the time of its oldest 
known compositions with assignable dates, is fully six 
hundred years later than the Moesogothic. In respect 
to the form of its inflections, and its phonesis, in some 
respects it is the newer, or more modem, of the two. 
But in the actual nimibers and amount of their inflec- 
tions there is not much difference between them ; while 
the general phonesis of the two is the same. 

About half way between the two, the first composi- 
tions of the Old High Gei^man present themselves. 
The import of the term High, and the points in which 
the High and Low divisions of the Gennan family differ 
from one another, will command notice as we proceed. 
At present the reader is referred to the extracts and 
remarks in §§ 39-42. 

§ 123. McBsogothic^ Old Norse, and Old High 
German Infiectiona. — It is from these that the points 
of agreement as between the three forms of speech 
under notice, and of difference as between the Angle 
and the Saxon, will be selected. 

The Article will be considered in the sequel. 

The Noun in general means the Substantive, the 
Adjective, the Pronoun, and the Participle. Everything 
that is about to be noticed under these several heads will 
be found in the Old High German, the present Literary 
German (which is High), and the Old Norse, in some 
shape or other, and to some degree. It will always 
appear in the same shape, viz., that of -r instead of -s, 
except in a few instances referable to the transitional 
period. But it will not always appear to the same 
extent ; i.e. in an equal number of individual words, 
belonging to the same divisions. In the Pronouns it 
will be most characteristic. 


(1.) The Nominative Case of the Noun. — ^This is 
the -s in the Latin words like Iwpua^ honua^ dena^ 
habens, mortuus^ gradus^ is (ea, id), &c., which 
in every similar case is wanting, except in fragments, 
in the Saxon dialects: as wolf, good, tooth, having, 
dead, step, son, &c. — and in the substantive is now 
wanting in the Literary German. But in this shape 
it will occur, more or less, throughout the three 

In both the Old High German and the Icelandic 
this -8 becomes r. 

In both the modem H. G. and the Swedish and 
Danish it is dropped altogether. 

(2.) The Nominative and Accusative Cases of 
Weak Substantives. — In Anglosaxon and Old Saxon 
these end in -ti ; or, if not in the vowel, changed or 
unchanged, which preceded it — as heortan = hearts. 

Ex.cept in the genitive plural, nothing in Saxon 
follows the n. The plural itself is bH/adane. In 
the McBSOgothic, however, the nominative is 7is ; i.e. 
iungons=tongues=ling. In Old Norse it is tungur; 
the -n- being, as usual, ejected, and the r, as usual, 
substituted for -s. 

(3.) The Neuter of the Adjective. — The sign of the 
neuter in M. G. is -^-, followed by -a — ^M. blinds ; N. 
blvadata. In the 0. H. G. it is z {ts). In the present 
Literary German -8 ; as blindes. In the Swedish and 
Danish it is, at tho. present moment, -t, and, a fortiori^ 
"t in the Old Norse. 

(4.) The 'S and -jB of the Pronouns. — ^Betweenthe 
true personal, the demonstrative, and the relative pro- 
nouns we find three forms in either -8 or -r, in M. G. 
and 0. N., which are wanting, or very rare, in the 

I. The Nominative Singular of the Demanstra" 



tive, &C. This, in M. Gr., ends in -«, as w = Latin is= 
A. S. A^; or hvas = Latin quia (inten'ogative\ and 
High Gennan wer. 

2. The Nominative Plural of the True Personals, 
i.e. those of the first and-second persons. — ^M. G. xveia 
=t^6= Latin 7i08, ^'i^ = ye = Latin =vo«; High Ger- 
man, win; Old Norse, ver; H. G. ihr\ 0. N. J?6r. 

3. The Dative Singular of the True Personals and 
the Eeflective. — M. G. mia, J>i«, sis = Latin mihi^ tibi, 
sibi; Old Norse, Trier^ J?er, ser; High German, mir^ 

(5.) 2%« Duals and Plurals of the Personal Pro- 
nouns. — Engl., our two=^L G. ugkara, vs two; and 
to us two, ugkis, 0. N. okkar, oJckr. 

EngL, your, you=M, G. izvara, izvis ; 0. N. ySar, 

EngL, your two, you ^i(;o = M. G. igqara, igqis. 
O. N. ykkar, ykkr. Here the 8 is retained as •r. 
(6.) The M. G. present runs thus — 


Singular. Plural. 

1. na^'a nasjam. 

2. na^'is na^'iit. 

3. nasji]^ na^and. 


Singular. JPlural. 

1. na^'au na^aima. 

2. nasjais fuuQai\>. 

3. noi^ai na^aina. 

In 0. N.— 


Singular. Plural. 

1. kallarm 1. luillum. 

2. ibi^r. 2. Jto;/tf>. 
8. il:a/2ar. 3. Xro^u. 


Singular. Plural. 

1. A^oZ^a kallen. 

2. >l'a//a kallen, 

3. A^/a A:a//en. 

The -u of the Conjunctive is still presented in the 
Swedish Imperative. See § 139. 

(7.) The Numerals 3 and 4. — There are in M. G. 


threia, fidvor ; in 0. N. thHr^ fiorir ; in A. S., 0. S^ 
and English three^ without the 8 at all ; and feoweTy 
four^ without any second r. 

(8.) For the fonns corresponding with ihere^ thither^ 
and thence, see § 159. 

§ 124. Phonesis of the High German. — ^From one point of riow tho 
foregoing remarks are unnecessary ; inasmuch as, in a classification 
based upon the older structure of the two languages, the closeness of 
the affinity between the Mcesogothic and Old Norse is partially re- 
cognised ; and so is the affinity between both and the Old High Ger- 

When we come, however, to a tabular view, and to a classification 
made for the purpose of showing the affinities as determined by the 
characteristics of the present time, some of which are certainly of com- 
paratively recent origin, the classification by no means places the M. O. 
and 0. N. so near one another as they appear in a genealogical tree, 
and in tho present work. The Old High German it removes to a still 
greater distance from both. 

In the conflict between these two classes of characteristics lies the 
justification of the previous details, which, from the first point of view, 
are, probably, superfluous. Practically, i.e. as a matter of opinion and 
teaching, tho difference is an important one. 

§ 125. Distribution of tJte Surds and Sonants. — It is on this distri- 
bution of the Surds and Sonants that the practical objection to the con- 
nection of the High German languages with either tho Norse or the 
Mcesogothic is founded. Under different names, such a,8 flat and sharp, 
soft or hardt voice sounds or breath sounds, vocal sounds or whispers, 
and, to some extent, as media and tcnues, the differetce of the two 
series, p, t, and k on one side, and by d, and g (as in gun), has long been 
recognised and acted on in details of grammar. For reasons which 
will bo given in tho chapter on Phonesis, the first series is caUed Surd, 
the second Sonant, as they are in Sanskrit. 

That the High German uses the former whore all the other dialects 
use the latter is a simple fact, and it is ono of no small importance. It 
does not use thom to the exclusion of tho others, but it uses them 
largely. It does not use them to the same extent with each of the letters 
of tho series, but it uses them, to some extent, in all. When it does 
this, it also substitutes s for t, though not at the beginning of words. 
At tho beginning of words there is a change ; viz., into c ( = /»). Thue 
— water, wasscr; hot, heiss ; better, besscr; sweeter, susser — tongue, 
sunge ; tear (Jacrima), sdhr ; ten, zehn; ttoo, zwei; tooth, eahn ; tin, 
zinn, &c. 

But the fundamental change is between the six mutes of ths 



double leriefl, surd and sonant, sharp and flat, hazd and sof^ according 

From h to 




{Old) High German, 









pereg {hill). 



paom {tree). 






pruoder, &c, &c. ; 

■ome of which may be found in the extracts from MuspiUi and the 

Weissenbnm Hymn, §§ 40, 41, as pediu = botht beide; prinnit churns; 

fi^by. Hence, it is only for the Old High German th&t|), in the place 

of A, is characteristic. 

From dUit, 

Do {/ado) 


High German 
tag, takh. 







Duck {cloth) 



From g to k. 

ESngUsh, Masogothic. {Old) High German. 

Goose — kans. 

Yard {gard-en) — karto. 

Thzooghout these three series, as a whole, we may remark the irre- 
gularity of the amount of the change ; for though not one of the lists 
makes any approach to completeness, the three fairly represent the pro- 
portions of the change ; and, in detail, each division has its peculiari- 
Ues. The first gives us the most instances; but it is the one in 
which the present High German least coincides with the Unguage of 
the older stage. In every one of the examples of the preceding list the 
prsMut Literary German agrees not with the O. H. G., but with the 
McBSOgothic and the other members of the &mily — hrechen, berg, baum, 
bkU^ bnidsr, &c The &ct is that |> is an exceptional sound through- 
out the whole family, and few, if any words of German origin begin 
with it. In the Bavarian dialect, however, it almost excludes b ; the 
Bavarian himself calling his country Peyem, Paiern. Nevertheless, we 
must not explain the change by reference to Bavaria alone. All we 
can say of |i is that, though limited to the High German, it is not co- 
SKtensiTe with it 


!E!rom th {)», or iS) to d. 

The part that d plays in the phonesis of the !ffigh Ghennan is a 
notable one. So far, however, as it is superseded by t it plays no part 
at all. As a substitute for another sound it plays a great one. 

The sound of the th in thin and thine (Greek Theta) is not a com- 
mon one. Many languages (the Latin for instance) are without it 
But it is found in their older stages in all the languages of the Qenn&n 
family ; with the exception of the High German. There we miss it 
Now the High German substitute for this is (2— the d which, in its own 
original iunction, has been displaced by t. 













That . 












This, however, is not a letter-change after the man- 
ner of the other three ; a change from sonant to surd 
or vice versa. It is rather a change from one of the 
so-called aspirdtea to the so-called lenea of its class. 
Neither is it a change for which we can see no definite 
reason. It is a substitute for a lost, or non-existing 
soimd, rather than a change made, without any osten- 
sible reason, from one sound to another. There is a 
reason why a substitute should be resorted to when the 
sound of th {p or "B) is lost. There is no reason why 
p, tj or k should have been preferred to 6, d, or g, when 
all six are at hand. 

From g to k. 

This is, at one and the same time, the sound in which the change is 
the least in amount, and the one in which the present High Gtfman 
least agrees with the Old ; for we have seen that where we say gooss 
and garden, the present Germans say gans and garden, HoMorer the 
words wherein both use the k are more numerous than their analogues 
in other two divisions ; as knee, knife, know, kiss, kettle, &c — jhsie, knif, 
kennen, kiissen, kessel, &c. In the Old High German we find the chaogs 
at its maximumj i.e, we find it just where we find that of b into^ Ses 
MuspUli, and Weissenbrun Eymn^ §§ 40 and 41. 


Again, what applies to the change between th and d applies to that 
between t and st. It is not a change between ^ounde of different degrees 
of eonancy. It is not even a change between two letters of the same 
division. It is rather a change of the sound of t itself; which, at the 
banning of words, makes part of a compound sibilant (to), and in the 
middle drops out — Umguej zunge (tsunge)^ &c., wat^, tcaasert &c. The 
sonnd which is now simply that of -8, is often found in the older stages 
of both the High and Low divisions spelt with a z (ts) — as gdcgitaz a 
gelegetea '^laid. 

The other changes which are generally given in the tables which 
illnstrate the preceding are of no importance in the classifications of the 
German languages and dialects one with another. Thus the change from 
btofoiv is foutid between dialects so nearly allied as the 0- Saxon 
and the Angloeaxon ; e.g. obar^ 0. S. ; over, A. S. That the 0. S. aba 
and the A. 8, of belong to a system ; and that that system gives the 
Latin ab, with which the 0. 8. agrees, while the Greek inh differs from 
both, are facts that indicate regularity and system in a department 
where it was long either overlooked or undervalued. 

So, also, does the identity of the English h in heart and head (in 
German herz and haupt) with the Latin caput and the Latin and Greek 
cord'(is) and Kap9la ; while the k in know, knot, kin, knee is in Latin 
and Greek yv6co, (g)nodus, genus, yivos, genu, y6w. 

All these are instances of order and system. But they are not facts 
which tOQch the present enquiry. It is necessary, however, to notice them 
because, in the opinion of the present writer, they have invested the fact 
of regularity to a certain degree in letter-changes with an importance 
which is sometimes overrated — especially in matters of classification. 

§ 126. The History of tlte Moeaogothic^ or the 
German of the Ootha of Moeaia. — Though we have 
hitherto seen but little of the Moesogothic, we have 
seen enough to show that it is a language which speaks 
for itself. On the archaic character of its structure 
alone we may assert the prerogative of the Moesogothic 
in respect to antiquity. What it is we know. But it 
is by no means so easy to say whence it came. The 
men who spoke it were, so far as they did so, Germans ; 
but it is not on the soil of Germany that we find them 
when it first occurs, nor to the soil of Germany has 
its origin ever been definitely and directly traced. 
Thai a German language originated, in some form or 



other, in Germany is implied in the very name. But 
the Germany of the present time is not the Germany 
of the seventh and tenth centuries ; nor is the Ger- 
many of the seventh and tenth centuries, with the 
Elbe and Saale (beyond which everything was Sla- 
vonic) for its boundary, the ^Germania^ of Tacitus. 
The language of the Goths, however, was not only 
German, but the representative of the German lan- 
guage in its oldest form ; and that to such an extent 
that there is no language in the German fj^mily which 
can be explained in some of its important details in 
the way of inflection without a reference to it. 

The Moesogothic is German ; but in what part of 
Germany it originated no one knows ; indeed, the his- 
torian, or ethnologist, who believes that, in the way of 
language, the parts of the 'Germania^ of Tacitus which 
lay beyond the Oder (and even beyond the Vistula) were 
German in its present sense, may hesitate to assign it to 
what is now called Germany at all. It is difficult to say 
how opinions are divided and distributed on this point 
It is only certain that there is no unanimity. 

What we know of its external history is as fol- 
lows : — 

At the beginning of the third century a German 
population was known on the northern side of the 
Lower Danube, in what was then called the Province of 
Dacia ; now the Danubian Principalities, or Wallachia, 
Moldavia, and Bessarabia. The Goths became formid- 
able to the Romans. They crossed the Danube, and 
invaded the north-eastern provinces of the empire. 
They defeated the Emperor Decius in a great battle. 
They ravaged the coasts of Greece and Asia Minor. 
They continued formidable ; and the Province of Dacia, 
to the North of the Danube, was surrendered by the 
Emperor Aurelian to the so-called barbarians. Here 


the Groths establish a kingdom ; and we know, in 
respect to its geography, that the valley of the river 
Dniester belonged to it — that it was probably the cen- 
tral part of it. They break up into two divisions, each 
with three names. They were called Ostrogoths or 
Visigoths from their geographical positions ; Amalungs 
or Baltimgs from the name of the royal dynasty ; and 
Gxutungs or Thervings from the names by which they 
seem to have designated themselves. However, collec- 
tively, they are called by the Somans Goths. 

In the last quarter of the fourth century they cross 
the Danube ; nominally by permission of the Komans, 
but actually as a nation of warriors going forth to 
conquer. By a.d. 400 they have sacked Rome under 
Alaric ; and thence form one kingdom in France, and 
another in Spain. This division is that of the Fmgoths. 

In the latter half of* the century the Ostrogoths, 
imder Theodoric, make themselves masters of Italy. 

But, though conquerors in three countries, they 
lose their language in all. It is smothered (so to say) 
by the Latin of the three conquered countries. 

They are never heard of, from first to last, in Ger- 

By the end of the fourth century these Goths were 
converted to Christianity — the Christianity of the Greek 
Church and of the Arian heresy. 

This conversion was accompanied by a translation 
of the Scriptures : the Alphabet being founded on the 

Of the translation, dating from the last quarter of 
the fourth century, we have remains, viz., the greater 
part of the Four Gospels. 

The particular division of these Goths who seem 
by their conversion to have been transformed from 
warriors into peaceful villagers, settled in a district 



near Philippopolis, in the Soman Province of Mceaia. 
The translation of their Scriptures is attributed to their 
Bishop, Ulphilas. 

Hence, Moesogothic^ or the language of the Ulpki- 
U/rie Gospelsj is the ordinary name for the chief frag- 
ment (the most important, though not the only one) of 
the language of these great Gothic conquerors. 

§ 127. Its Uncertain Chardder. — The result is 
that the first locality to which we can assign the 
Moesojjfothic is the distant province of Moesia ; then, 
less definitely, to Italy ; and then to Graul and Spain ; 
but never to the soil of Grermany. Yet, unless we 
believe that it represents the language of tBat part 
of a ' Germania ' which lay beyond the Vistula, we can 
scarcely suppose that it was foreign from the very first 
to the historical Germany. All this, however, is a 
matter of inference rather than of testimony. The 
Ostrogoths called themselves Thervingi. This points 
to Tkuringia. So early a writer as Michaelis (and I 
have no reason to suppose that he was the first who 
did so) suggests, on the evidence of the present dialect 
of that district, that Thurmgia was the original home 
of the Moesogoths when they were occupants of German 
soil ; and those who investigate the relations of southern 
Thuringia to the line of the Danube, and the history of 
the Marcomanni, may easily believe that, under another 
name, they worked their way along the March till they 
reached the Dnieper, and in the country of the GetcR 
became called Goths. But this is only inference ; and, 
in the eyes of the upholder of the Germanism of 
the ' Gei^mania^^ is (in the face of the text of Tacitus) 
inference of a wholly unnecessary character. That the 
Old German is, in some, at least, of its forms, Thurin- 
gian, few are likely to deny. But, then, it is High 
German, and the conflict of characters again comes id 


to perplex us. I believe this is a fair statement of the 
difficulties of the question in general. 

That they subtract from the value of the previous 
evidence as to the affinities between the northern and 
the southern extremities of the area to which the Angle 
district belongs is clear, inasmuch as the language 
which agrees with the Old Norse in its Low German 
character, is just the one which we cannot absolutely 
assign to the parts to which we assign the Old High 
Oerman ; whilst the German which we can so assign is 
not Low, but High, 

To objections on this score I can only say that, for 
the present argument, I hold that the Moesogothic 
affinity is sufficient — amply sufficient. It is better, of 
course, if by subordinating the difference of High and 
Low to that of the evidence supplied by the inflections, 
we can correct the three forms of speech. But it is 
held to be sufficient if it is good for the connection 
between two of them. Upon the value of the two 
classes of characters, as determined by their intrinsic 
merits, more will be said in the sequel. 

§ 128. Specimbns. 

Mark, chap. i. 

1. AxASTODXiirB aivagge\joii8 i'esuis xristaus lunaus gu)Mi. 

2. Sre gaineli)> ut m esHi in praufotaa. sai. 'ik insao^a aggila 
meinanA fiinra Ims. saei gainanvei> vig )>emana faura huji. 

8. Stibna Topjandins lo auhidai. manvei> vig fraujins. raihtos 
Tmurkeil' ttaigoi ga|>8 unsaris. 

4. Vas lohannes daupjands i'n au>idai jah meijands daupeio idreigos 
da aflagdnai firaTaurhte. 

5. Jah UBiddjedim du i'mma all ludaialand jah lairuBaulymeis jah 
danpidai Tesun allai 'in laurdane awai fram imma andbaitaodaoi fra- 
Taorhtim seinaim. 

6. Vasii> J>an lohannes gaTa8i|>8 tnglam ulbandaus jah gairda 
fiUeina bi hap seinana jah matida >ramBteins jah mili> hai^ivisk jab 
marida qi^anda. 


7> Qiini)> svinl^oza mis sa afar mis. >izei ik ni im Tair)>fl anahnti- 
yands andbindan skaudaraip skohe is. ab)>an 'ik daupja izvis m vatin. 

8. Ip 'is daupei> 'izvis 'in ahmin yeihamma. 

9. Jah vur)> in jainaim dagam. qam 'iesus fram nazarai> galeilaias 
jah daupi[»s vas tram 'iohanne 'in 'iaurdane. 

iO. Jah suns usgaggands us >ammaTatin gasaw nslnknans himinans 
jah haman sve ahak atgaggandan ana 'ina. 

11. Jah stibna qam us himinam. >a is sunns meins sa linba. in 
>uze vaila galeikaida. 

12. Jah suns sai. ahma 'ina ustauh 'in au>ida. 

13. Jah yas in >izai aujndai dage fidyortiguns fraisans from, satanin 
jah yas mi)? diuzam jah aggileis andbahtidedun 'imma. 

14. I\> afar ))atei atgibans yb,t\> lohannes. qam 'iesus 'in galeilaia 
merjands aiyaggeljon >iudangardjo8 gu)7s qi^ands >atei usfullnoda >ata 

15. Jah atnewida sik ))iudangaidi gut's. 

16. Idreigo> jah galaubei> in aiyaggeljon. jah warbonds faur 
marein galeilaias gasaw seimonu jah andraian brof'ar is. ^is seimonis. 
yairpandans nati 'in marein. yesun auk fiskjans. 

17. Jah qa> im 'iesus. hirjats afar mis jah gatatya igqis vairjian 
nutans manne. 

18. Jah suns affetandans \>o natja seina laistidedun afar imma. 

19. Jah jain>ro 'inngaggands framis leitil gasaw 'iakobu ^$nB, 
zaibaidaiaus jah 'iohanne bro>ar ia jah >an8 in skipa manijandans 

20. Jah suns haihait ins jah affetandans attan seinana zaibaidain 
in >amma skipa mi> asnjam gaIi|>on afar imma jah gali|>un 'in kafar- 

21. Jah suns sabbato daga gale'ihands in synagogen laisida ins jah 
usfilmans yaur)>un ana ]>izai laiseinai 'is. 

22. Unte yas laisjands 'ins sye yaldufni habands jah ni syasye >ai 

23. Jah yas in ]>izai synagogen ize manna 'in unhrainjamma ahmin 
jah uf hropida qi>ands. fralet 

24. Wa uns jah )>us iesu nazorenai. qamt fraqistjan una kann 
)>uk was )>u is. sa yeiha gu>8. 

25. Jah andbait 'ina 'iesus qihands. ]>ahai jah nsgagg nt ns Jiamma 
ahma unhrainja. 

26. Jah tahida 'ina ahma sa unhrainja jah hropjands stibnai mikilai 
usiddja us imma. 

27. Jah afslauhnodedun allai sildaleikjandans. syaei sokidedun 
mi|> sis misso qi|>andans. wa sijai )>ata. wo so laiseino so niujo. ei 
mi> yaldufi\ja jah ahmam ]>aim unhrainjam anabiudi> jah uf hanqasd 

28. U^di^'a pan meri>a is suns and allans bisitands galeilaiaf. 


29. Jah suns us Mzai synagogen nsgaggandans qemtm in garda 
seimonis jah andraiins ]ni> iokoban jah lohannem. 

30. I> sraihro seimonis log 'in brinnon. jah suns qe>iui imma 
bi ija. 

31. Jah duatgaggands urraisida j>o undgreipands handu isos. 

32. Jah affiulot )>o so brinno suns jah andbahtida i'm. andanahtja 
>an yaur]>anamma. >an gasaggq sai^. bernn du i'mma allans]>anB 
nbil habandans jah unhulj>ons habandans. 

33. Jah so baurgs alia garunnana vas at daura. 

34. Jah gahailida managans ubil habandans missaleikaim sauhtim 
jah iinhuI|>on8 managos usrarp jah ni fralailot ro^jan ]>os unhul]>ons. 
note kun>ednn ina. 

35. Jah air uhtvon usstandans usi'ddja jah galait]> ana au]>jana 8ta]> 
jah jainar ba>. 

36. Jah galaistans Taur]>un i'mma seimon jah ]>ai mij> imma. 

37. Jah bigitandans ina qe)>un du imma J>atei allai ]>nk sokjand. 

38. Jah qa> du im. giiggam du >aim bisunjane haimon jah 
baurgim. ei jah jainar merjau. unto dul>e qam. 

39. Jah Tas mexjands in synagogim ize and alia galeilaian jah 
uiihnl)K>n8 usTairpands. 

40. Jah qam at imma hrutsfiU habands bidjands ina jah knivam 
knusqands jah qi]>ands imma ]>atei. jabai vileis. magt mik gah- 

41. I> iesus infeinands ufrakjands handu seina attaitok imma jah 
da)> imma. yiljau. vairj> brains. 

42. Jah bi)>e qa]> ]>ata iesus. suns >ata >rutsfill affiti> af imma jah 
brains Tar>. 

43. Jah gawo^jands imma suns ussandida ina jah qa)> du imma. 

44. Saiw ei mannhun ni di)>ais yaiht ak gagg >uk silban ataugjan 
gocyin jah atbair firam gahraineinai l>einai. ]>atei anabauh moses du 
TeitTodi]>ai im. 

45. I)> is usgaggands dugann merjan filu jah U8qi>an )>ata raurd. 
srasre Is. ju>an ni mahta andaugjo in baurg galei]>an ak uta ana 
«i)>jaim stadim Tas jah iddjednn du imma allaJ>ro. 

§ 129. 

Icdandic. — Fiom Snorro's Heimskringla. 

Ynglinga Saga. — Kap, i. 

Sra er sagt, at kringls heimsins, s^ er mannf61kit byggir, er n\jdk 
Tagskorin : gioga hof Bt6r in ^tsjanum inn i jordina. £r )>at kun- 
nig^ at haf gengr af Njorvasundum, ok allt iA til J6rsala-land8. Af 


hafinu gengr langr hafsbotn til landnordrs, er heitir Svartabaf : sa 
skilr helms >ridjungana : heitir fyrin austan Asia, en fyrir vestan kaUa 
sumir Evropa. en sumir Enea. En nordan at Svartaliafi gengr Svijjod 
in mikla eda in kalda. S7i]>jod ena miklu kalla sumir menn ecki minni 
enn Serkland hit mikla ; sumir jafna henni yid Blaland hit mikla. 
Hinn neyrdri lutr Svi]'j6dar liggr obygdr af frosti ok kulda, swa sem 
hinn sydri lutr Blalands er audr af solarbruna. I Svi)>j6d em 8t6r 
herut morg: )>ar eru ok margskonar ]>jodir undarligar, ok margar 
tungur : har cru risar, ok ]>ar eru dvergar : ]>ar em ok blamenn ; J>ar 
eru dyr ok drekar furdulega storin. Ur Noidri fira :QoUum ]>eim, er 
fyrir utan eru bygd alia, fellr k um SyiJ>j6d, s^ er at rettu heitir 
Tanais ; h^n var fordum kbllut Tanaqvisl edr Vanaquisl ; h^ k^mur 
til sjavar inu i Svarta-haf. I VanaqTislam var ]>a kallat Vanaland, 
edr Vanheimr ; s^ a skiir heims>ridji^ngana ; heitir fyrir sustan Asia» 
en fyrir vestan Evr6pa. 

Fyrir austan Tanaqvisl i Asia, var kallat Ajsa-land edr Asaheimr ; 
en hofutborgina, er i var landinu, koUudu J>eir Asgard. En i borginni 
var hofdingi sa er Odinn var kalladr, ]>ar var bl6t8tadr mikilL par 
var >ar sidr at 12 hafgodar voru seztir ; skyldu ]>eir r4da fyrir bl6tum 
ok' domum manna i milli ; hat eru Diar kallndir edr drottnar : )>eim 
skyldi >j6nustu veita allr folk ok lotning. Odinn yar hermadr mikill 
ok mjok vidfoniU, ok eignadiz morg riki : ban var sva Sigrfsell, at i 
hvorri orustu feck hann gagu. Ok sva kom at bans menn trudu ^vi, 
at hann setti heimilann sigr i hverri orastu. pat var b4ttr bans ef ann 
sendi menn sina til orustu, edr adrar sendifrarar, at hann lagdi adr 
hendur i hofut >eim, ok gaf ]>eim bjanak ; trudu ]>eir at ha mundi vel 
farasc. Sva var ok um bans mann, bvar sem )>eir urdu i naudum staddir 
a sja edr a landi, >a kolludu )>eir a nafn bans, ok ]>6ttuz jafnan f& af 
>vi fro ; >ar >ottuz } eir ega allt traust or hann var. Hann f6r opt sva 
langt i brot, at hann dvaldiz i ferdinni morg misseri. 

In Eh-glish. 

So is it said that the earth's circle which the human race inhabits is 
torn across into many bights, so that great seas run into the land firom 
the out-ocean. Thu8 it is known that a great sea goes in at Niorvasund, 
and up to the land of Jerusalem. From the same sea a long sea-bight 
stretches towards the north-east, and is called the Black Sea, and 
divides the three parts of the earth ; of which the eastern part is called 
Asia, and the western is called by some Europa, by some Enea. North- 
ward of the Black Sea lies Swithiod the Great, or the Cold. The Great 
Sweden is reckoned by some not less than the Saracens' land ; otheis 
compare it to the Great Blueland. The northern part of Swithiod lief 
uninhabited on account of frost and cold, as likewise the southern parts 
of Blueland are waste from the burning of the sun. In Swithiod ars 
many great domains, and many wonderful races of men, and many 


kinds of languages. There are giants, and there are dwarfs, and there 
are also blue men. There are wild beasts, and dreadftillj large dragons. 
On the north side of the mountains which lie outside of all inhabited 
lands runs a riyer through Swithiod, which is properlj called by the 
name of Tanais, but was formerly called Tanaquisl, or Vanaquisl, and 
which falls into toe ocean at the Black Sea. The country of the people 
on the Vanaquisl was called Vanaland, or Vanaheim ; and the river 
separates the three parts of the world, of which the eastermost part is 
called Asia, and the westermost Europe. 

The country east of the Tanaquisl in Asia was called Asaland, or 
Asaheim, and the chief city in that land was called Asgaard. In that 
city was a chief called Odin, and it was a groat place for sacrifice. It 
was the custom there that twelve temple godars should both direct the 
sacrifices, and also judge the people. They were called Diars, or 
Drotners, and all the people served and obeyed them. Odin was a 
great and very far-travelled warrior, who conquered many kingdoms, 
and so successftil was he that in every battle the victory was on his 
side. It was the belief of his people that victory belong^ to him in 
every battle. It was his custom when he sent his men into battle, or 
on any expedition, that he first laid his hand upon their heads, and 
called down a blessing upon them ; and then they believed their under- 
taking would be successful. His people also were accustomed, whenever 
they fell into danger by land or sea, to call upon his name ; and they 
thought that always they got comfort and aid by it, for where he was 
they thought help was near. Often he went away so long that he 
passed many seasons on his journeys. 

§ 130. Those who are not above betaking them- 
selves to mechanical contrivances may bring the Old 
Norse into something like its older form by substituting, 
in the preceding specimen, -« for -r wherever it is in- 
flectional. In doing this he will not go wrong more 
than once or twice in a dozen instances ; so regular is 
the change. If this help him in the appreciation of 
the influence of the single change from Sigmatismus 
to Bhotacismus, he may continue the illustration by 
attaching -n to the inflections in -a; the infinitive 
moods, and the definite (weak) inflections more espe- 
cially. Between the two he may learn the extent to 
which the eschewal of Nunnation, though a single 
change, affects the general aspect of a language. 


In both of them, though not to the same extent, the 
Frisian agrees with the Norse. And this is the main 
likeness upon which the recognized affinity between the 
two has been founded; and that legitimately — so far 
as it goes ; but we have seen that, as a rule, the other 
details of the Frisian are Westsaxon. In the substitu- 
tion of the -r for -8 the High Grerman, like the Frisian, 
is Norse. The old nominative case ends in -r ; but the 
sign is soon abandoned. In the High German, how- 
ever, the plurals of nouns end in -r rather than in -8. 
The nunnation the High German dialects retain ; and, 
with the exception of the Frisian, the Low German do 
the same. The Northumbrian is the first to drop it. 
The Dutch of Holland still retains it. 

Nevertheless, the tendency to change, in some 
degree or other, is found throughout the whole German 
family. The Saxon dialects have not only held (we 
may say pertinaciously) to the -8, but have extended its 
application to the genitive of feminines ; and we know 
that at the present time it is nearly the only sign 
of inflection we have. But even, as such, so far as the 
distinction of one form from another is concerned, it is 
scarcely an inflection at all. It is only to the eye that 
the genitive singular is distinguished from the nomina- 
tive plural ; as father's = patris^ fathers = patres ; 
whilst it is only the nature of the main word or the 
context (one or both) that distinguishes the third person 
of the verb from the noun — as he walks a long way^ 
he takes long walks. Yet in words like our^ and ^vere^ 
with others of less importance, the older form was not 
only in -8, but has left traces of its having been so — 
e.g. in Old Anglosaxon iise and usse ; and wa^ in the 
present English. 

The mere change, then, is, by itself, no character- 
istic of much value ; since it is found, more or less, in 


different forms of speech. Its value is determined by 
(1) the extent of its operation, and (2) the period at 
which it sets in ; which is nearly, though not quite, the 
same thing as its o*ate. 

§ 131. Rate of Change, &c. — Upon the question of 
eoctent little need be said ; inasmuch as it has already 
been illustrated, to some degree, explicitly and in 
detail ; while more has been suggested by implica- 
tion ; since it was because they operated very decidedly 
on the languages under notice that certain changes 
were used as characteristics. That of rate, however, 
commands our best attention ; especially imder the 
particular aspect just indicated, viz., the period at 
which such or such a change began to operate. This, 
independent of the amount of its action, is of pri- 
mary importance. Otherwise, we may in our com- 
parison of languages which, at one period, were little 
more than dialects of a single form of speech, find them 
so altered by changes subsequent to their separation 
from the parent tongue as to be placed in different 
classes when compared (or rather contrasted) with one 
another, in their later stages. Reasons will be given in 
the sequel, for believing that, in two notable instances, 
this has been the case with the Northumbrian (or 
Angle) and the Norse. 

§ 132. As the question thus presents itself we have 
three epochs. 

1. The last quarter of the fourth century (say a.d. 
375) when we first get the Moesogothic ; destined for 
more than three centuries to be the representative of 
the German fiunily. 

2. The eighth and ninth centuries, when we get in 
the Anglosaxon (both Westsaxon and Northumbrian), 
the Old Saxon, and the Old High German, the first of 
the remaining languages of tJie family that can be 


oompared with either the Moesogothio or with one 

3. The eleventh century is the time when we first 
get an adequate amount of data for the Old Norse. 
That, what with the Sunie inscriptions, and what with 
the fragments assigned by the earliest Norse writers to 
the older poets (Scalds), we may get an inkling of some- 
thing older is not denied. For an adequate literature, 
however, the eleventh century is as early a date as can 
be given. 

The intervals implied by these dates are, by no 
means, inconsiderable ; but this is not the only diffi- 
culty. Two others must be added. The two forms of 
speech which most especially interest us are the Moeso- 
gothio and the Northumbrian ; and of each the history 
is incomplete. The Moesogothic, as we have seen, is 
mainly represented by a single composition ; whilst, to 
the soil of Grermany, either in its own proper form, or 
by any generally recognised directly descended dialect, 
it has never been traced. The Northumbrian, on the 
other hand, though known by something like a litera- 
ture in the ninth and tenth centuries, has no continuity 
in its history ; for we have already spoken about the 
great break, or blank, during the eleventh, twelfth, and 
thirteenth centuries. Between the latest of the Glosses 
and the last quarter of the thirteenth century we have 
only a few lines to represent it. 

§ 133. It is now necessary to state, or perhaps 
repeat, the exact points towards which the present in- 
vestigation is directed. It has nothing to do with the 
differences of dialect between the northern and 
southern forms of speech in our island. These are not 
only already recognised, but have been admirably 
elucidated by enquirers who have done much and pro- 
mise to do more. What is attempted is an historical 


and geographical elacidation of their import. Nor 
does this mean the setting up of any wide lines of de- 
marcation between them. It does not make them 
alien and opposing forms of speech. It goes no farther 
than the asdgnment of definite and special parts of 
Germany &om which the Angle on one side and the 
Westsazon on the other originated. But it does mean 
that those are precise and natural ; that each coincides 
with the origin of the name under consideration, and 
that each gives a difference of dialect coinciding with 
recognized differences of south and north in Great 
Britain ; and that the two points are in Germany, and 
in Great Britain, north and south to one another. 

Nor does it mean that a connection, on the one side 
with Denmark, and on the other with Gaul, implies 
much difference in respect to the descent of the West- 
saxon and the Northumbrian from a common parent ; 
or that Scandinavian elements exclude German. Any 
g^eat difference made in this respect, on the strength 
of the division into High and Low German, is not one 
of my making, though it is, certainly, one which I am 
prepared to consider in the sequel. 

§ 134. On the other hand, it is not to the effect 
that the Danish and Angle were one and the same 
dialect of the same language. They were rather 
dialects with subdialects; the ^minimum difference 
between them being found on the common frontier. 
There is no reason, however, to believe that, in the 
sixth century, they bore different names. It is in the 
sixth century when the name Dane appears for the 
first time ; but only to the effect that in 516 a Dane 
named Chochilaicus was killed in the Netherlands. 
Denmark, as a country, is not heard of for more than 
two centuries afterwards. 

There was likeness and there was difference ; and 


of each we may give the measure so far as it bears on 
the present doctrine. The Danish in the time of Beda 
may easily have been as like the Northumbrian as 
the Westsaxon was; i.e. a mutually intelligible lan- 
guage; so that just as Beda made no distinction be- 
tween the Angle and the Saxon (preferring English as 
the common name), he may have made none between 
the Angle and the Danish. Liker than this the two 
languages need not have been. Unlike we suppose 
them to have been so far as it is necessary to account 
for the difference between the Northumbrian of the 
Glosses and the Norse when we first get an adequate 
representation of it in the eleventh century, or (even 
if we say the tenth) three hundred years after the death 
of Beda, and about two hundred after the last of the 
Glosses. In investigating this we must remember that 
it is not the Danish of England that is compared with 
the Northumbrian, but rather the Danish, or Norse, 
of the Continent ; and that after it had reached a point 
so far from the Old Angle district as Iceland. 

Nor does the connection of the Danish (Norse of the 
Angle frontier, as we may call it) imply any inordinate 
difiference from the Westsaxon. Both go back to either 
the Moesogothic, or some closely allied form of speech ; 
and both differ from it merely in a variation of the 
details of their change. The Frisian, however much 
we may hesitate to refer to it in preference to the 
Norse, is, to some extent, a transitional form of 
speech ; though only one between the Saxon and the 
Angle ; the Angle itself coining between the Norse and 
the Frisian. 

This means that, in the sixth century, the dis- 
tinctive characters of what is now the representative 
language of the Scandinavian division of the Ger- 
man class had not become sufficient to separate the 


two classes; and with this I leave the exposition of 
the nature of the suggested aflfinities. The differ- 
ences are considerable now ; but they were inconsider- 
able twelve hundred years ago. The changes during 
this interval by which they were brought about, so far 
as they are capable of investigation, along with their 
approximate dates, will be noticed as we proceed. 

§ 135. The two great breaks in the continuity of 
the three languages under notice — the Moesogothic, 
the Norse, and the Northumbrian — have already been 

The little I can do towards filling them up consists 
in the following three notices ; two of which bear on 
the change from the *Sigmatismus of the Moesogothic 
to the *Shotacismus of the later forms of speech, and 
the third upon the renmants of the *Nunnation. 

The first applies to the Moesogothic itself: the 
other two to the Norse. 

§ 136. ^Asting^ and 'Oarding* in the Gothic. — 
These are, word for word, the same ; inasmuch as both 
forms are GK>thic ; the form in -8 being the older one. 
The word in either form is a rare one. So far, how- 
ever, as it goes it is an instructive one. The proper 
name "AaTiyyoij as applied to a population of Dacia, 
first occurs in Dio Cassius ; Jornandes, who is an Ostro- 
goth, uses the same form ; Cassiodorus does the same, 
he also being an Ostrogoth. Lydus, referring to an 
event during the reign of Justinian, tells us that the 
word was a title of honoiur ; his form being A^ivagi^ 
with the -«. But, in a Spanish, or Fmgoth, record 
referring to the same period, it is Gardingij and this 

* I ^d it conrenient tx> use these somewhat scholastic tennsforthe 
diflerence between the languages under consideration in respect to their 
' adoption or ayoidance of the sounds of S, B, and N, in infleetionfl. The 
Sigmatismns ia characteristic of the Moesogothic 


194 Casting"* and 'carding.^ — «/5' and ^er.^ 

it is wherever it is found (and it is found more than 
once) in the Fiaigoth Code ; and that with the second- 
ary meaning of Nohle which it has under the form 
Aating in *Lydus. 

§ 137. 'la' for' Er,Uhe Old Norae Pronoun.— The 
older Eunes give us the older form ia for er ; the former 
being the McBsogothic demonstrative. 'It is found,' 
writes Mimch, 'oftenest in the old old {cdd-gamle) 
forms ia and icw, oftener compounded (contracted) into 
aas, sarJ^ — KortfaUet FrematiUing^ &c., p. 32. 

§ 138. '/s' for 'er, the AtucUiary Verb. — From 
the same writer — ' The auxiliary verb vera gives gene- 
rally, or, at least, a majority of forms in -a — ^viz., in 
the present indicative iat {eat), ia (iaa, ea) ; infinitive 
viaa {vead) ; participle viaandi {veaandi) ; preterit 
indicative singular vaa, vaat, vaa.' — Ibid., p. 29. 

§ 139. Reraai/aa of the Nunnation i/fi 0. N. — In 
the M. G. the third person plural for both the present 
and the past tenses of the subjunctive mood ended in 
-Tia ; as naajaina = aanent ; naaidMeina = aanarent. 
This -n, concurrently with newer forms in -^, is found 
in the Old Swedish of the Bunic period. It is also 
found in the i/mperative of the present Swedish. See 
Ibid.j p. 29. 

§ 140. The PoaUpoaUive Article and the ao-^xJled 
Paaaive Voice, — But the two points in the structure of 
the Scandinavian languages upon which the most stress 
has been laid are (1) the post-positive article, and (2) 
the so-called passive voice. 

§ 141. The Poat'poaitive Article. — In M. G. the 
definite article is as follows : — 

* This is from Zeuss, pp. 461, 462, and note. The foregoing refer- 
ences toll ns all that is known about the Astinffs, Their history seemf 
to have been merged in that of the Goths in generaL 







Norn, sa. 



Gen, this. 



Dai, thamma. 



Ace, thana. 



m, thB. 



Norn, thai. 



Gen, thisc. 



Dat, thaim. 



Ace, thans. 



Except that this gives us the characteristic 8 of the 
old langiiage, as opposed to forms like there^ thera^ and 
ihei/rj which take -?', this is little more than the definite 
article both in the Old Saxon and the Westsaxon ; in 
neither of which is there anything remarkable. Sa 
and 80, or ae and 8eo, differ from J^c^, just as in Greek 
6 and 17 differ from to ; and in the three languages 
they all precede their noun, and stand apart from 
it as separable words. And this is what articles do in 

In Norse, however, the equivalents of sa^ 80, thatdj 
and 6, Vj '^^9 ^^ ^^) hinuj and hit ; and these, instead 
of preceding their noun, follow it ; and instead of 
standing apart from it as separate words, coalesce with 
it. In the present Danish the i has become e ; and, as in 
the present Danish, the mdefinite article is en for the 
masculine, and -e^ for the neuter genders. Then the h 
of the definite article is dropped, the two articles, form 
for form, become confluent, and it is only by their 
position that they are distinguished ; e.g. en mand=a 
TitaUy et bord = a table, while manden = the man, and 
b<yrdet=ithe table. 

Hence, in both Danish and Swedish, i.e. the modem 
descendants of the Old Norse, the forms from the 



root 8 have disappeared, and the substitution of the 
derivatives of hin for those of 86 and 'pcet is complete. 
Both the McBsogothic roots are excluded, and a post- 
position in the garb of inflection is substituted for the 
familiar separable and independent prefixes of the Ger- 
man and the Greek languages. 

With all this difference, however, there is a great 
amount of likeness. The M. G. 8a and s^, though lost 
to the Dani8h and the Swedi8h, are preserved in the 
Icelandic from the time of the earliest Eunes to the 
present day ; the only difference being that they are 
classed as demonstrative pronouns rather than as defi- 
nite articles. Between the two, the difference is of tlie 
slightest ; indeed, in most languages where both occur, 
either one may be used where we expect the other, or 
equivocal constructions may present themselves. Sucli 
a one is the combination that one Englishman would 
translate by the and another by that. 

If we take this as a convenient test, and apply it 
to the old forms of the Norse, we shall find something 
very like two articles, one of old and one of recent 
origin; the two for a time destined to be used con- 
currently, but the older, at length, destined to be su- 

Hin is the form that is most decidedly articular. 
In extreme cases like Frederic the Second^ George the 
First, &c., where that is out of the question, it pre- 
dominates — AH hin Fro^a=Ari the Wise ; Fro^ hin 
Frdkne=:Frode the Active, &c. 

On the other hand, in contexts like # 

The man that lias not miisic in his soul, 

where there is a relative to follow (so that the article 
belongs to the noun of the antecedent), and where thai, 
though not incompatible with the text, is rarely used^ 


the Norse pronoun is not Ain, but «d, or su, according 
to the gender. And er follows. 

Thus, from a single division of a single poem in the 
Metrical Edda we have — 


Seg^u >at, GagnralSr, 
hye s& YoUr heitir ; 
Er fizmask Ti'gi at 
Surtr ok in svasu gotS ? 

Say-thou Gangrad, 
how the plain is caUed ; 
Where is found (the) war between 
Snrtnr and the sweet god ? 


SegHvL )>at Gangra^r, 
hye M& k heitir ; 
£r deilir med jotna sonum 
grand ok me'S go1$um ? 

Say-thou Gangrad, 

How the river is called ; 

Which divides between the Jotun*s sons 

(the) land and between (the) gods ? 

Edda Samundif Vaflfrudnismdi^ 17-16. 

Here ad and av, are, at least, as good for articles, as 
they are for demonstratives; while i/n precedes its 
noun ; is separated from it ; and has, moreover, dropped 
the initial h-. 

This is, certainly, something like the present post- 
positive article in the process of formation, the date 
being the eleventh century. However, if it were 
carried back to the ninth it would still be three hun- 
dred years subsequent to the latest recognised date for 
the Angle invasions of Britain. 

To this we may add that in one notable case, at 
least, the phenomenon of a post-positive definite 
article is manifestly of late origin. In the Italian, 
French, and Spanish derivatives from the Latin the 

198 THB (so-called) passitb yoice. 

definite article is a simple and secondary form of the 
demonstrative iHe, in its ordinary independent form, 
and in its iisual place as a prefix to its noun. But in 
the Wallachian and Moldavian of the Danubian Prin- 
cipalities it is, as in Icelandic, a post-^OBition, more 
like an inflectional case-ending than a separate word, 
and, as such, wholly in contrast to its congeners of 
Italy, France, and the Iberian Peninsula. In Wallachian 
and Moldavian U uomOy el hornhre, Vhomme is 6mul 
= homo iUe ; oameni-i = hommeS'-illi ; dmului = 
hominis iUi/ua ; 6a7neni-lor^ liominum iUorv/m. Fem- 
inine — IccLs-a = casoriUa ; kaae-le^casceillce; kaae-lor 
= casarum-illarum — muer-ea^wAili&r ilia ; Tnuere-i 
= mulieris illius ; Tnuer^le = mulierea iUce ; Tauer- 
Hot = mulierum illarum. To forms like these it is 
impossible to assign any considerable antiquity; for 
the Eoman conquest of Dacia was little more than 
four hundred years earlier than the Grerman conquest 
of England. 

The actual absence of this Postpositive Article in 
the Danish of South Jutland will be noticed in the 
sequel. At present it is sufficient to draw attention to it. 
§ 142. The {80-caZled) Passive Voice. — Passive 
is the term applied to the second voice in the Scan- 
dinavian languages ; where, so far as the fact of its 
power being indicated by an inflection goes, it is a 
true voice ; and, as such, a very prominent character- 
istic. But it is, to a great extent. Deponent; per- 
haps as largely so as in Latin. Again, it is certainly 
Middle rather than Passive ; certainly, too, as fsu- as 
its construction goes, Reflective ; and, in respect to its 
meaning, to a great extent. Reciprocal. Historically, 
however, it is so evidently a compound that it is only 
in its latest forms that it differs from such an evident 
combination of different words as the French se frap^ 

THE (so-called) PASSIVE YOICE. 


or the German sick acJUagen = to beat his {one^s) 

This means that it is no Inflection at all. 
rhe present or latest form of this so-called Passive 
; the penultimate form, -^t ; the next oldest form, 
)r -sAj ; the original form, aik = (Jivmyadf in Eng- 
; aich in German ; and ae in Latin and French ; 
simply the Eeflective Pronoun. It is used, how- 
, for all the three persons, and for both numbers. 



1. Jeg elsker 

2. Da elsker 

3. Han elskor 


Thou lovest. 
He loves. 

1. Yi elske 

2. I elske 

3. De elske 


We love. 
Ye love. 
They love. 

1. Jeg elskede 

2. Da elskede 

3. Han elskede 


I loved. 
Thou lovedst. 
He loved. 

1. Yi elskede 

2. I elskede 

3. De elskede 


We loved. 
Ye loved. 
They loved. 



1. Jegelskes 

2. Da elskes 

3. Han elskes 


I am loved. 
Thou art loved. 
He is loved. 

1. Yi elskes 

2. I elskes 
8. De elskes 


We are loved. 
Ye are loved. 
They are loved. 

1. Jegelskedes 

2. Daelskedes 

3. Han elskedos 


I was loved. 
Thou toast loved. 
He was loved. 

1. Yi elskedes 

2. I elskedes 

3. De elskedes 


We were loved. 
Ye were loved. 
They were loved. 

200 THE (so-galled) passive toice. 

Now the actual process of this contraction of mik 
=m6, and aik^se^ is found going on (we might almost 
say beginning) so late as the tenth century, i.e. in the 
very oldest Norse known to us. In other words, the 
combination of the Verb with the Eeflective Pronoun 
is so loose that it scarcely justifies us in assigning a Be- 
flective, Middle, or Eeciprocal Voice to the Old Norse, 
unless we also assign one to the French, the Italian, and 
the German as well. As time, however, goes on, the 
case alters, for aik soon serves for all the three Persons, 
and no longer corresponds with the Nominative Case of 
its Verb, when it is either the speaker or the person 
spoken to — ^the result being combinations like je as 
lave^ rums a'ai/ment, &c., in French, and noa ae lava- 
Tihus^ V08 ae amatia in Latin. Then the k becomes f, 
and -at is the sign of the Passive Voice. Finally, as, 
in the present Danish and Swedish, the -t itself is 
dropped ; so that words that began as elska aik, and pro- 
ceeded as elakaak, elakaat, become, in Swedish, elakaa, 
and in Danish, elakea, i.e. Passives after the manner of 
amor and tvttto/lmw, rather than Eeflective construc- 
tions like je aula aimSj and ich bin geliebt. 

§ 143. Now it is clear that inflections like the two 
under notice are not, necessarily, of any great anti- 
quity. As a general rule, indeed, it is true that inflec- 
tions are oftener lost than developed ; in other words, 
that combinations like / have ivritten take the place of 
single words like yiypa<f>aj oftener than single words 
like ysypa(f>a take the place of combinations. That 
this is a rule of great generality and importance is 
beyond doubt. But its generality is easily exaggerated. 
The Futures in both the French and the *Italian are 

* In the French parlerai, and the Italian parUro (where the -ai and 
•0 hare long been admitted to represent the rerb habeo), the change tf» 
manifestly, a late one. 


undoubted instances to the contrary ; and it is submit- 
ted that both the Post-positive Article and the Passive 
Voice in Norse are instances of the same kind. Indeed, 
it is only in a general way that the rule as to the change 
from Synthetic to Analytic, and not vice versa, can be 

§ 144. It is not pretended that the evidence upon 
either of these points is conclusive ; and it is not denied 
that they are weighty ones in the present argument. 
I don't think that, if it were certain that, in the time 
of Beda, these two inflections were as fully developed 
as they are in the Norse of the tenth century, the doc- 
trine of the Angle and the Danish being sufficiently 
alike to pass for the same language would be tenable. 

The uncertainty, too, as to the original geographi- 
cal position of the Moesogothic has much to do with 
this inconclusiveness ; for, if the Moesogothic, as a 
matter of certainty, could be shown to have been 
spoken on, or within, the Angle frontier in the fourth 
or fifth century, the descent of the Old Norse would 
be imdoubted; and the later origin of forms like 
bordet and elskes, &c., would be recognised as a matter 
of course. The question, however, is not so simple as 
this ; so that we can only take it as it presents itself, 
and press it only so &r as it will go. 

§ 145. The affinities between the Northumbrian 
and Norse which will now be brought under notice are, 
of course, those wherein both the Norse and the North- 
umbrian di£fer from the Westsaxon. It is not appre- 
hended that any of the instances will either be objected 
to, or treated as accidental. The only point upon 
which there may be any question refers to their origin. 
Are they due to contact with Norse settlers during a 
time when the Norse and English languages were as 
distinct (or nearly so) as they were in the tenth 


century ; in other words, to what is usually called ^ Norse 
vnfluencea ; ' or are they due to an original aflSnity as 
close (there or thereabouts) as that between the North- 
umbrian and the Westsaxon, and anterior to the diflFe- 
rentiation and divergence of the Angle and Danish 
languages ? It is not likely that all the forthcoming 
instances will be of equal value in this respect. Those, 
however, that bear most especially on the question will 
be treated at length. A notice under each of the 
Frisian aflBnities will be added; and they will show 
clearly that they are Westsaxon rather than Northum- 

§ 146. The two important exceptions to the rule 
that the Frisian agrees with the Westsaxon rather than 
with the Northumbrian are the two connected with its 
Phonesis ; in respect to (1) its Nunnation and (2) its 
Sigmatismus. It has less of both than the Westscaxon ; 
though the absence of neither is quite so conspicuous 
as it is in the Norse. 

§ 147. Eschewal of the Nunnation ; Change from 
-an to -a. — This we find in three inflections : 

a. In the Weak (or Simple) Substantive — A, S. ; 
edgan = eye^a and eyes, &c. ; tungan = tongue^a and 
tongues, &c. ; naman = nam£s and nam/sSy &c. — in 
Frisian aga^ tunga, nama, &c. 

6. In the Definite Adjective — A. S. gddan = 6ont, 
6cmcp, bono, in the Singular ; and boni, bonce, bona, 
bonos, &c., in the Plural. In Frisian the form is 

c. In the Infinitive Mood of Verbs — A. S. deman 
= judicare, bceman = urere, &c. ; in Frisian, demo, 
berna, &c. 

In all these the Northumbrian agrees with the 
Frisian, and both with the Norse. 

§ 148. Rhotacismus. — The substitution of -r for -« 


is found in Frisian only as the sign of the Plural of 
Substantives — A. S» cyningas =: kings ; in Frisian, hen- 
inga/On In this it agrees with the Norse, and with the 
iVbn-Sazon dialects of Germany ; whilst it differs from 
aU the dialects of England. 

§ 149. Between these two processes we get in Old 
Norse the forms tungur=:tongue8, where in A. S. we 
find tungan, and in Frisian tunga. This is because in 
MoBSOgothic the -n was followed by an -8, and the full 
form tuggdna = linguce and linguaa was the result. 

The Norse drops the n, but changes the -a into 
-r; herein following the Moesogothic and standing 
alone in doing so ; since all the other members of the 
German family drop the inflection altogether; none 
retaining either the a or any representative of it. 

§ 150. The Extenaion of -8 to the Feminvne Geni- 
tivea. — ^The a in the present English is common to both 
the Masculine and the Feminine Genders. In West- 
saxon it was limited to the Masculine and the Neuter ; 
and traces of the distinction are found in the fourteenth 
century. In the Northumbrian the change begins 
earlier. In the Modem Danish and Swedish this iden- 
tification of the two inflections has led to another 
Scandinavian character, which is manifestly of recent 
origin.' The Icelandic has the usual three Genders. 
The Danish and Swedish have only two. But these 
two are (in contrast with those of the languages of 
Latin origin) not the Masculine and Feminine, but the 
Common and the Neuter. 

§ 151. The Defective Inflection of *HeJ* — In the 
Glosses we find the Pronoun of the Third Person de- 
clined as in the Westsaxon ; i.e. with all its present 
forms (he, him, her), and with four others now lost. 
These are the Singular Accusative hine, and the Pliu-al 
forms hi = they ; heora = their ; and heom = them. 


Now the total abandonment of the form in -n, or the 
Accusative Singular, is nothing more than what \re 
have at the present time ; where it is superseded by 
hirriy originally a Dative. And the same applies 
to the displacement of all the plural forms of he by 
tliey, &c. The peculiarity of the Northumbrian, how- 
ever, is the early date at which these inflections of he 
disappear. Though found, as we have already stated, 
in the Glosses, they are not found in the Northumbrian 
of the thirteenth century ; i.e. the earliest Middle 
Northumbrian known. 

This displacement of the Plural of he by that of 
the^ along with the loss of the true Accusative in -fh 
leads us to the notice of the relations of both tlie and 
he with se, 

§ 152. 'He,' 'The; and 'Sc'—Fcrc the Definite 
Article in McEsogothic see § 141. Except that it uses 
8 or z where the other two dialects use r, it is the same 
as the Old Saxon and the Westsaxon ; in other words 
they all agree in giving it a full inflection, in which, 
with the exception of the Nominative Singular, of the 
Masculine and Feminine Gendei*s, the radical form is 
th-, or the root of that, they, their, tJien, and them, all 
of which are, in the present English, Demonstrative, 
or (so-called) Personal Pronouns rather than Articles. 
As Personal Pronouns they have, in the Plural Numr 
ber, displaced and superseded the old plurals of he, as 
shown in the preceding section. 

Meanwhile, the Nominatives Singular, ISIasculine 
and Feminine, are sa, 86 ^se, seo ; of which the first has 
entirely dropped out of our language ; while the latter 
with a change of both forms and meaning has displaced 
the older heo, and is retained as she. 

The same inflection, with the same retention of the 
forms sa and 8U (compare the Greek 6, 17, to), charac- 


terises the Old Norse ; with the difference (as we have 
seen) of the power of the forms being those of the 
Demonstrative Pronoun rather than those of the Defi- 
nite Article. In all this and much more, the Middle, 
and, to some extent, the older Northumbrian differs 
very widely. 

It gives us p- for s-, in the Glosses. 

It has got rid of the Accusative Masculine Singu- 
lar, and all the plural forms of he before the fourteenth 

For these it has substituted the pliurals of th- ; the 
result being that in the Middle Northumbrian, the 
Definite Article is simply that of the present language 
— just as simple and just as destitute of inflection. Se 
has disappeared altogether ; and she represents Iieo. 

But the Tnaximuni of contrast is that between the 
Northumbrian and Norse ; as may be seen by compar- 
ing such a simple form as the with the complex and 
exceptional Postpositives of the Scandinavian system. 

It is possible, however, that through this very notable 
difference, and, to some extent, in spite of it, may not 
only the affinities between the Norse and the Northum- 
brian, of which we have already said so much, be 
maintained, but, from one point, may be strengthened : 
inasmuch as reasons will be given for treating the 
whole series of changes in respect to the roots A-, ^/i-, 
and «-, whether as Definite Articles or Demonstrative 
Pronouns, as parts of a system ; in which case the evi- 
dence in favour of the recognised points of likeness 
between the two languages being due to original 
affinity rather than to subsequent contact would be 
greatly strengthened. 

§ 153. TJie -n- vn the Ordinal Numbers, — In the 
Westsaxon the ordinals for 7, 8, 9, 10, 13 — 19 end in 
'Otha ; as seofotha, ealUothoj nigotha^ teotha, ihretlieo- 


tha^ feowerteotha — nigonteotha, i.e. without any Uy as 
in seventh, tenth, &c. 

In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries these were^ 

sevethe, nethe^ and tethe (in the Southeito dialects). 
sevendet neghende, tende (in the Northern dialects). 
seventhCt ninthe, tenthe (in the Midland dialects). 

The Midland forms are formed from the Northern ones, and made 
their appearance in the fourteenth century; and the latter are Gf Scan- 
dinavian origin. In the Northumbrian Gk>spels we find seofunda^ 
Cp. 0. N., 7, sioundi ; 9, niundi ; 10, tiundi; 13, threitandi; 16, fim' 
tandit &c — Morris, Historical OtUlines, p. 114 and note. 

§ 154. The eachewal of the form aind, &c, — ^These 
are conspicuous in the Westsaxon ; We are. Ye are. They 
are, being specially Northumbrian. The Icelandic 
runs : 1. em ; 2. eri, er ; erum, eru\ ; 3. em. In this 
the Frisian agrees with the Westsaxon. 

Old Frisian. — Wi, 7, hja send ^ we, &c, are. 

East Frisian. — Wi be, we aunt Soldat = we two {both), we are sol- 

" Frisian of Heligoland. — Wann wi to freden sen » when we contented 

. — Wisen ja lick van stann^we are likes of 


North Frisian. — Wu sen jit di jest fuurtein Juar = we are yet {now) 
just fourteen years. 

§ 155. No form in -inne, a Gerundial or Dative 
Case of the Infinitive. — In Westsaxon luftan^s^amare, 
to lufianne=ad amand/um. 

This is not a pure case of Nunnation, or retention of 
the final -n — not, at least, in the first instance. 

In not having the form at all, the M. Gr. agrees with 
the Norse. The Frisian, however, which agrees with 
the Norse in dropping the -n of the Infinitive, retains 
it, without the final -e, in the Gerundial, or Dative 

foim ; thoogii tlie exact <Mrigin is uncertain ; inasmuch 
as in the Old Frisian ire find such forms as to demanded 
to delande^to judgcj to doonu 


Han vat vijr jer to tRm t 
But vbat was here to do? 

Help ans! lor vma sa dat vu 

WeUig sen, de vei to jram^m. 

Help ns, learn ns, so that we 
Willing be the wa j to go. 

Sknld en Kemmer of en Lek 
Vias wat fiinl to drdtm maake — 

Should a trouble or a sport 

Us (8ome)what fool to try make — 


Din es Hoogheid, Din es maght ! 
Du heest alias anr to reeden I 
Din es wisheid ! Fol Bedaght, 
Weest Da allcs baast to rteden, 

ThiDe is Highness, thine is might ! 
Thou hast all to advise (rede) ! 
Thine is wisdom ! full thought, 
Thou knowcst all best to advise. 

§ 156. No Participial Prefix^ as gt-neredj ge4tifod 
szhealedj loved, — ^This prefix is preserved in the 
Frisian, and found in the Mercian of England. In tho 
Westsaxon it is very common during the Middlo 
period, universal in the older, and predominant in both 
the High and Low Grerman of the Continent, through- 
out all, or almost all, of its latest dialects. In short, 
its absence is characteristic of the Norse and the North- 

* The retention of the 4ff^* ^ ^^ A>^ "^t o^ ^^^ Perfect Partici- 
ple, which in the Middle Westsaxon is often ^ectcd (j/^brokemgebroctn}^ 


but which, except w?ien there is an -n- in the verb iisefff is universal at 
tho preso^nt time, is also Norse. But it is not a point of any character- 
istic importance ; inasmuch as it prevails in all the other German forms 
of speech. The real peculiarity, in this respect, lies with the Westsaxon 
and the modern English. t 

* The Strong Verbs form the Past Tense by strengthening or mo- 
difying the stem vowel. The.Past Participle ends in -en, but this ter- 
mination is dropped whenever a nasal (in, 71, or ng) is found in tho pre- 
ceding syllable. Thus bei/ie, bait, bytten; but clym, clam, clum (for 
clumben) ; fynd, /and, fund (for funden) ; ri/nff, rang, rung (for rungen). 
In drynk we may thus drop the -en and make drunk, or we may expel 
the n of the stem, and retain the termination, drukk-en (compare the 
Norse drukken). In cum-en, after dropping the -en, d is added to dis- 
tinguish the past participle from tho present tense : *' tha/re cum^d,"* 
Eng. come. Old Northern dialect cvm-en. This rule is of course un- 
written, but it is invariable ; I have not observed the same regularity 
in the dialect of any other district or of any period. No rule can be 
given for the dropping or retention of -en in the Book-English.' — Mur- 
ray ; The Dialect of the Southern Counties of Scotland, p. 201. 

§ 157. Absence of the Signs of Person in the 
Preterits. — This is what we have in the present Eng- 
lish ; but the Southern forms were — 

A. S. Middle English (A. 8. and Mercian), 

1. lufode. 1. lifoden, 1. lovede, 1. loveden, 

2. Ivfodest, 2. lufoden, 2. lovedest, 2. loveden, 
8. lufode, 3. lufoden, 3. lovede, 3. hvedtn. 

The Old Northumbrian anticipates the present 
Englisli ; and has the simple form in -d throughout. 
The Old Norse retains the inflections nearly as they 
are in Moesogothic — talde^ talde, talde^ told/umy toldu^y 

§ 158. Persons m the Present Indicative in -s, 
— This is so characteristic of the Northumbrian, and,, 
indeed, of the other two dialects, that Dr. Morris has 
taken it as a test. 

These dialects are distinguished from e«nch other by the uniform 
employment of ccrbiin grammatical inflexions. 


A eoarenient tert is to be found in the inflexion of the plural num- 
ber, present tense, indiaitive mood. 

The Northern dialect employs -es, the Midland -en, and the Southern 
-eth, as the inflexion for all persons of the plural present indicative. 

Northern, Midland, Southern. 

1st pers. hop-e9, hop-en, hop-^M, we hope. 

2nd ,, hop-e9, hop-en, hop-eM, ye hope. 

3rd „ hop-e9, hop-en, hop-eM, thoy hope. 

The inflexions of the singular number, though no absolute test of 
dialect, are of value in enabling us to separate the West-Midland from 
the East^Midland. 

The West-Midland conjugated its Terb, in the singular number and 
pesent tense, almost like the Northern dialect. 



Ist pers. 
2nd „ 
3rd „ 





The West-Midland of Shropshire seems to hare employed the 
Southern inflexion -ee^, and -eth as well as -ee in the second and third 
persons singular indicative. 

The East-Midland dialect, like the Southern, conjugated the verb in 
the sing. pres. indie as follows. 

1st pers. 


2nd „ 


8id „ 


Some of the East-Midland dialects geographically connected with 
the Northern seem to have occasionally employed the inflexion -ee in 
the 2nd and 3rd pers. as well as -ee^ and -eth. It is mostly found in 
poetical writers, who used it for the sake of obtaining an extra syllable 
liming with some nouns {dur. and adverbs in -e. 

The West-Midland is further distinguished from the East-Midland 
dialect, in employing the inflexion -ee for -est in the 2nd pers. bing. of 
regular verbs. — Specimens of Early English^ § 7. 

Those who are satisfied with treating -a as a mere 
softening of the Westsaxon -th, and then supposing 
that the sign of one person is extended to others, will 
see nothing in all this that bears upon any connection 
with the Norse. But, if wo look to the Scandinavian 



languages in general and to the Moesogothic, the case 
takes a widely different form. 

The Moesogothic Present rims— 

Singular, Plural. 

1. nBsja usajatTna, 

2. napjtff sas/aK 

3. nasjij) ji&sjand, 

and the same fulness and distinctness of inflection we 
find in the Old High German, 
In Icelandic we find — 

1. kaUflr. 

1. koUtfm 

2. kal^r. 

2. k611tt>. 

3. kal^r. 

3. UUu, 

In Danish—^ 

1. kaUer 


2. Italic* 


3. kaller 


In Swedish — 

1. kallar. 

1. kalla. 

2. kallop. 

2. kaUa. 

3. kallar. 

3. kalla. 

§ 159. Here the Old Icelandic has a near approxi- 
mation to the Moesogothic and the Old High Crerman ; 
and it retains it to the present day. 

The Danish and Swedish, doing just a little more 
than we do in English, retain a distinction for the 
number, but make no distinction for the persons, of the 

But as, with the exception of the Genitive Singu- 
lar, every Moesogothic inflection in -8 becomes an -r in 
Scandinavian, the -r of the Singular may be held to 
represent the original -s. Hence, it has its proper 
place, like the Northim:ibrian -8, in the second Singular 



only. But it is extended to the other two. It is just 
the same with the Northumbrian -s. Considering that 
this extension is common to the two languages, it is 
reasonable to suppose that the same process is in opera- 
tion in both, and that the -s in Northumbrian agrees 
in its origin as well as in its application >vith the -r 
of the Danish and Swedish ; the one preserving the 
original -s, the other changing it into -r. 

§ 160. The Absence of Genitives Plural in -ne,-^ 
These are those of the Substantives of the Weak De- 
clension : — ^Masc, hanena ; Fem., tungena ; Neut., 
heortena in A. S. — hanani; tuggdnd; hairtenS, in 
M. Gr. In English, cocka^ ; tongues^ ; heart8\ It is 
not difficult to see that the early loss of these Geni- 
tives in the Northumbrian is part of a system ; the 
system which eliminates the -n from the Infinitive 
Mood of Verbs. The same avoidance of the Nunnation 
presents itself in the Old Norse ; where, for Mascu- 
lines which end in -t (i.e., not in a, the termination of 
the Feminine and Neuter Substantives), the Grenitive 
Plural is simply -a ; as geisl-i = geiaUa. Where the 
Nominative case, however, ends in -a, the -n is either 
retained or inserted — oh differentiam. Such, at least, 
is the suggestion of Sask. 

§ 161. Here, Hither j Hence^ &c. — ^The best evi- 
dence, liowever, of the affinities of the Norse and 
Northumbrian being due to a common influence is 
foimd in the following table : — 

Mctsogothic—YKt^ >a>, >a)>TO — therty thither ^ thence. 
h^r, hi>, hid[r6~ here^ hither ^ hence. 

Old High German. — hoAr, huora, huanana — wherCy whither, whence. 
d&r, dara» danana — there, thither , thence, 
h^r, h6ra, hinana — here^ hither, hence. 

Old Saxon. — hoar, hoar, huanan — where, whither, whenet. 
thar, thar, thanan — here, hither, hence, 
h^, hibr, li^nan — there, thither, thence, 



nohthumbbian and kobsiu 

Anglosaxon, — ^J>ar, >ider, >oiian — there, ihithtr, thence, 

hvan, hvider, hvonan — where, whither, whenee, 
her, hider, henan — here, hither, hence. 

Middle High German. — dA, dan, d&miQn-^there, fc, j-c, 
wA, war, wannen — there, ^c, 4^. 
hie, her, hennen — there, thither, thence. 

Modem Hiffh German.'—da., dar, dannen — there, fc, j'C, 
wo, wohen, wannen — there, ^'C, j'C, 
hier, her, hinnen — here, j'c, fe. 

Old Norse. — >ar, >a1$ra, >at$an — there, thither, thence. 
hvar, hvert, hva'San — there, j-c, ^c. 
h6r, he'Sra, he^n — here, fc, j'c. 

So far as this goes it is only in the M. G-. and the 
0. N. that the }? appears in the third series : where it 
appears with a difference. It may be added, however, 
that it also appears in the Northumbrian, and that 
without a difference. 

§ 162. The preceding table is from Grimm. The 
following extract is from Dr. Morris : — 


23. Absence of the pronouns 
ha or a ^ he ; hine = him (ace.) ; 
wan « whom, which (ace.) ; his 
{Jiise, is) = them ; his {is) = her. 

24'. Use of hethen sshence; the- 
then = thence ; whethen » whence. 


Use of the pronouns ha (a), 
hine, wan, his {hise, is), his (is). 

Unknown in Southern Dia- 

Specimens of Early English, Part II. Introduction, zzii., § 8. 

The whole list of Dr. Morris's Granmiatical Diffe- 
rences between the Northern and Southern dialects may 
be read with advantage ; but the two under notice are 
selected and compared because, to some extent, they 
seem to stand to one another in the relation of cause 
and effect ; and, if such be the case, it implies that the 
remarkable use of such forms as hethen, thethen, and 
whethen belongs to a system common to the Norse and 

^HEREj ^HITHEBy ' HENCE.' 213 

Northumbrian fonns of speech rather than to the acci- 
dent of mere geographical contact. 

The Southern and modem forms in -oe are mani- 
festly foimded on an earlier form in -^ ; as is shown by 
the words hennes, whennea, thennea ; the change of -es 
to -ce being a mere point of spelling. But these forms 
in -n are by no means of regular occurrence in the 
Xorthumbrian ; whilst, in the Norse, the whole system 
to which they belong is deranged. This derangement, 
or/atttt, as we miglit call it in geological phraseology, 
has already been suggested ; one of its results being 
the Definite Article hin. That the /i- is the A- in Ae is 
certain. But what is the import of the -n ? In the 
A. S. and 0. S. hine^ and in the German ihn^ it is the 
sign of the Accusative Case ; being as different from 
A«, or 6r, as ettm, in Latin, is from is. Then there is, 
for the Pronoim of the Third Person, a series of forms 
of a very peculiar kind. 

The root is A, followed by a vowel ; but not the 
vowel i, as in hin. In the Masculine Gender it is a ; 
in the Feminine, o or n. Meanwhile, the -n is treated 
as a part of the fundamental word, and hans = his = 
ejus is the Genitive Case of hauy while hen7iar=h€r= 
ejus^ as applied to a female, is Genitive of hun = ea. 
The Objective is formed by adding -m ; as hononi = 

This treatment of -n as a part of the theme rather 
than as a sign of case, along with the process of distin- 
guishing the Personal Pronoim from the Definite Arti- 
cle, and the Genders of the Personal Pronoim itself by 
changes of the vowel, is of far more importance as a 
characteristic of the Norse than either tlie Post-position 
of the Article or the so-called Passive Voice ; and it 
certainly has had the effect of limiting the use of -?i 
as a sign of the Accusative, in the other two roots of 


the series under notice. The Norse equivalent (word 
for word) for then or than is den ; but it stands, not 
for illum^ but for iUe ; in other words, it is Nomina- 
tive, Of the A. S. hvcene. Middle English wan, Grer- 
man wen, there is, in the present Danish, no equivalent 
at all — not even (as we expect from the analogies of hen 
and den) as a Nominative Case. The Danish for who, 
qui, or ris, is hvem — just as if we said hi/m for he — 
whilst the Adverb of time (= when in English) is a 
wholly different word — naar. 

§ 163. There is no disturbance to this extent in the 
Northumbrian. But, in a lesser degree, there is some- 
thing of the same kind. Hme^eum, and wan^quem 
are excluded from the Northiunbrian of the Middle 
Period by Dr. Morris. At the present time the use of 
than as an Adverb of Comparison is, comparatively, 
rare ; and, perhaps, in Scotland, is an Anglicism. That 
hethen, thethen^ and whethen are imknown in the 
Southern Dialects is the statement of Dr. Morris. The 
present notice shows us that they are known in Norse, 
and, what is more important, known nowhere else. 

That the use of -n is a deviation from its original 
import is clear ; and, being so, it may be called ' Abusive^ 
or ' CatachrestiCf according to the language from which 
we choose to derive our term. As a characteristic of 
language in which it presents itself this ' Catachreais of 
-72,' is of sufficient importance to claim a definite name ; 
and so it will be called when, in conjimction with the 
Post-position of the Article and the (so-called) Passive 
Voice, it is alluded to as one of the three peculiarities of 
the Norse. 

§ 164. This is the evidence afforded by grammati- 
cal forms. That whicli is derived from the similarity 
or identity of particular words is of less importance ; 
though it is well known that words common to the 


Danish and English are more conspicuous in the 
Northern dialects than the Southern. They are gene- 
rally referred to geographical contact rather than to 
the original aflSnity of dialect. ^Daniah^ ' Scandinon 
vian^ or ^Norse^ however, in these cases means, of 
course, something more than the occurrence of the 
same word in Britain and Scandinavia. It means 
^peculiar to Scandinavia'* as opposed to Germany; 
inasmuch as words common to the three divisions of 
the family are no more Scandinavian than Crerman, and 
vice versa. Words of this kind may be counted by 
the thousand. But imless they are shown to be non- 
existent in the German they are of no value : and what 
with the proverbial diflBculty of proving a negative, 
what with the extent of the German literature, and 
what with the number of the German Dialects, it is 
dangerous for anyone to assign a word exclusively to 
Scandinavia ; and those who, like the present writer, 
have done so at one period of their life generally re- 
tract their opinion as their experience increases. 

The only words in Scandinavian that can safely be 
treated as other than German, arc those derivatives 
from non- German languages, such as the^Lap, the Fin, 
the Slavonic, the Lithuanic, or the Keltic. But these 
are, themselves, scarcely Scandinavian. Nor are they 
numerous. Moreover, whether numerous or not, none 
of them have hitherto presented themselves in English. 

§ 165. Still, there are certain words which have a 
better claim to be considered Scandinavian than others ; 
i.e. those that are current and conspicuous in the 
Danish, Swedish, and Icelandic ; whereas, if they are 
found in German at all, they are found either in the 
proWncial dialects or in writers of an earlier period. 

Of these there are two divisions ; the recognition 
of which is, in the philology and ethnology of the 


Norse parts of Britain, of great and exceptional im- 

The distinction between Proper names and Cora* 
rnxm names is an instrument of criticism ; and, of Pro- 
per names, those of geographical objects and localities 
have most especially commanded notice. 

The particular word that has done the most service 
in this way is the word by=town^ in compoimds like 
Grimsfty, Spilsiy, and some hundred others. It is 
preeminently a Danish word. Caster, too, in the place 
of Cheater is a Danish fomij and Skip-,, Carl, Orm^<, 
and Kirh, imply Danish occupancy. Hence, where the 
English parts of Britain give us Charlton, DorcAea^r, 
Shipton, and TTormfihead, the Danish forms are Carlby, 
Aacaater, Skipton, Ormahead, and Ormakirk, Any 
ordinary map supplies the list of these. They are the 
most numerous in Yorkshire, especially in the East and 
North Hidings ; but Yorkshire is an inordinately large 
county. For its size, Lincolnshire gives us the most. 
Then, at a great distance, Leicester, Nottingham, 
Derby, and Northampton. We lose the word by in the 
south at Eugfty, and on the north in Durham — ^Ba&t^. 
It is to be found, in patches, in Norfolk and Suffolk. 
Elsewhere, on the eastern side of England, they are 
either undiscovered or imdiscoverable. From York- 
shire, however, they follow the western feeders of the 
Ouse to its watershed, which they cross, and then re- 
appear in Cumberland, Westmoreland, Lancashire, Che- 
shire, the Isle of Man, and North Wales ; at least in 
such names as OrrrCa Head. In Ireland, we have a new 
instrument of criticism. In Carling/ord!, Strang/ord, 
and Wexford, the final syllable has not its orcUnaiy 
import. It means an arm of the sea; in short, is 
the Norwegian Fjord, And so it is in the Firth of 
Forth in Scotland. In this coimtry the distribution of 


the hys is remarkable. We have it at Duncans&j/ 
Head in the extreme north, and we have it in Eskdale 
and Annandale in the south-west. Otherwise the hys 
are exceptional. As proper names, these give us a long 
list. But they are not comrfvon names. They are all 
proper names, the names of geographical localities. 

It may be expected that where we find these, we shall 
find common names also. But such is not the case. If true 
Danish c(ym,mon names exist in one part of Great Britain 
more than another, it is in Scotland; but that is just 
where the local names give us the fewest signs of Danish 
occupancy. This anomaly, however, has been, to some 
extent, explained. Mr. Worsaae, in his ^ Danes and 
Northmen,' has shown that it is only the Danes of Den- 
mark proper that exhibit this inordinate partiality for 
villages ending in -6y, and that in Norway they are 
rare. In Iceland, pre-eminently a Norwegian colony, 
they are not to be found. The admitted inference is 
that it was Norwegians who assailed and circumnavi- 
gated /Scotland, but Danes who assailed j^n^land ; and, 
from the parts about Kixkhy Lonsdale, &c., crossed the 
watershed, and gave us the numerous -6^s of Ciunber- 
land and Selkirkshire. 

§ 166. It is doubtful whether, though true in the 
main, this explanation is complete. The Norse of the 
Orcades, as represented by the Shetland Paternoster, 
is undoubtedly Norwegian as opposed to Danish, and 
the Norse of Lincolnshire, &c., as represented by nu- 
merous local names in -6?/, is as undoubtedly Danish 
as opposed to Norwegian. But, if the present view 
be right, there are for both Norway and Denmark 
two kinds of Danish and Norwegian. There is, for 
each, the Norse of the earlier period, when the dif- 
ference between what afterwards became the Danish 
and the Northumbrian English, was little more than 


that between two mutually intelligible dialects; and 
there is Norse which, at a later period, has become a 
distinct language from the English. The Norse of the 
north of Scotland was not only the Norse of Norway, or 
Norwegian, but it was the Norwegian of the period 
when the diflference between the two languages was 
complete. The Norse of Lincolnshire and Yorkshire 
was the Norse of Denmark, and, probably, that of the 
later period. But the Norse of the parts between the 
Tees and Forth, of Diuham, Northimiberland, and the 
Lowlands of Scotland, is in a different category from 
both. It differs from the Orcadian in not constituting 
a separate language; and in this it agrees with the 
Norse of Yorkshire and Lincolnshire ; and it leads the 
investigator to the perplexing fact that, contrary to 
expectation, the distribution of the Common names in 
Norse by no means coincides with that of the Proper 
ones. There are no local names in -by between Raby 
on the Tees and Duncanaby Head on the northern ex- 
tremity of Scotland ; none in Northumberland, none in 
Berwickshire, none in the Lothians ; the Norse elements 
being numerous. In Lincolnshire the local names are 
numerous, the other Norse elements being inconsiderable. 

There are three forms, then, in which, according to 
the present treatise, we find the Norse language in 
Britain: (1) The Norwegian of the Orcades and Caith- 
ness ; (2) The Danish of the districts where the termi- 
nation of 'by predominates ; and (3) The Norse, which, 
by hypothesis, is as much Angle as Danish, or in other 
words, a form of the German, of no later date than the 
sixth century, out of which the present Danish, Swedish, 
and Icelandic were subsequently developed. This last 
is the only one upon which more need be said. 

§ 167. Retrospect. — Internal Evidence. — The evi- 
dence as to the original connection between the North- 


umbrian and Danish, rather than the mere contact of 
two dialects which afterwards diverged from one another 
so £Ekr as to constitute different languages, being the true 
cause of the acknowledged points of similarity between 
the two forms of speech, so far as it has been submitted 
to the reader, has hitherto consisted solely and wholly 
of their relations in the way of grammatical structure ; 
and so much so that no cognizance has been taken of 
individual words ; and it is believed that evidence of 
this kind is sufficient. 

In respect to the details themselves there is little 
or nothing which has not been recognized. Neither 
is the notion that it is from a common origin rather 
than from Norse influences of the ninth, tenth, and 
eleventh centuries a new one. I think it safe to say that 
thirty years ago the original affinity, or approximate 
identity of the Angle and Danish was considered tlie 
sounder doctrine of the two; and that words quoted 
as Danish due to contact with historical Danes were 
looked upon suspiciously ; nor am I sure that such is 
not the prevalent doctrine at the present time. That 
there were Norsemen in Britain as early as ever there 
were Angles is certainly a view which has numerous sup- 
porters. Neither is the advent of the first Angles so 
definitely fixed for the sixth century as that of the first 
Saxons is fixed for the fifth ; for those who think them- 
selves constrained to believe that Hengist was the earli- 
est of the Saxon conquerors, are by no means tied down 
to think the same of Ida the Angle, who may have had 
predecessors. The little that runs contrary to doctrines 
more or less received is really a matter for the Scan- 
dinavian scholar rather than the English. It touches 
the history of the Norse language more than that of our 
own. And in respect to this the leading points are of 
the simplest. The great characters that at present 


distinguish the Norse languages from the English and 
German are, as we have seen; (1) The Postpositive 
Article ; (2) the Passive Voice ; (3) the Catachresis of 
the -n, three in all. Whether these are characters that 
could be developed between the Angle invasion of 
England and the date of the earliest specimens of the 
Norse (say a.d. 550 and 950 — there or thereabouts) is 
the leading question for consideration. Subtract these 
from the Norse as it is known to us in the earliest com- 
positions ; compare the language as we may suppose it 
to have been without them with the Northumbrian ; 
deduce the latter from that part of Germany which the 
name Angle, or EngUsk, suggests; bear in mind its 
geographical relation to Denmark ; and, finally, com- 
pare both with the Moesogothic. 

The resiolt will be that the language from which we 
get the Durham Glosses and the Northumbrian of Scot- 
land was, in the sixth and seventh centuries, little more 
than a variety of the German of the parts between 
the Weser and the Eyder, which, on the continent, 
developed itself into what are now the Icelandic, the 
Swedish, and the Danish. 

§ 168. Retrospect — External Evidence, — ^Wemay 
now safely say that if we can get this from the internal 
evidence of the structure of the two languages them- 
selves, we shall not find much (if anything) in the way 
of external evidence to oppose to it. It is not as if in 
the sixth and seventh centuries the area of Denmark 
and the name Danish were what they are now, or even 
what they were in the ninth century. The only Danes 
that are mentioned during the fifth century (when the 
name appears for the first time) are those of Procopius, 
who seem to have been on the frontier of the Wami 
(the Wami themselves on the Angle frontier), and the 
' GhochHaicvs Danua ' of Gregory of Tours, Fnnn 


Ghr^oiy we know only that this great Dane made a 
descent upon the Netherlands, and was killed. But 
where he came from no one can say. There is nothing 
that connects him with what we afterwards know as 
Denmark. Where the Danish March was, or whether 
there was any at all in the sixth century, we have no 
means of knowing. If it was the March of the Marco- 
manni of the ninth century, it was south of the Eyder, 
and close upon the Angle area. 

This Chochilaicua may or may not have been 
Havelok the Dane. If so, he is enough of an Angle to 
be connected, by tradition, with England. That he 
was the Higelac of ' Beowulf^ has been generally ad- 
mitted since the time of Outzen (a.d. 1816), and 
Higelac ia enough of an Angle to be associated with 

The Danes themselves of the Anglosaxon Chronicle 
are as little traceable to the soil of Denmark as the 
Danes of Procopius, and as Chochilaicus. They came 
according to the notice from Herethorland^ a name 
which itself requires explanation. Those who place it 
in Denmark only do so because certain Danes are 
assigned to it. 

That this is an insufficient reason is evident, but the 
bearings of it require a special notice. It is clear that 
if we invest the Denmark of the times of Ida and his 
Angles with the dimensions of the Denmark of our own 
times, the difficulty of conceiving its language as little 
more than a variety of the Angle increases with the 
magnitude of the area. The larger the extension of a 
form of speech the greater is the likelihood of its being 
a separate substantive language rather than a mere 
dialect, subdialect, or variety, or vice versa ; and if it 
were certain that when Northumbria was Anglicized by 
certain Germans from one side of the Elbe, Jutland and 


the Danish Isles had already been Danecized by certain 
Germans from the other side, the doctrine that the 
difference between the Norse and the English is of later 
date than the seventh and eighth centuries would 
require more evidence than has been found for it. 
But we have no certainty that such is the case. We 
have no evidence that the Germanization of Jutland and 
the Islands is a day older than that of Northern England. 
We fail, however, to realize this because when we hear 
of Danes we refer them to what we subsequently know 
as Denmark ; the real fact being that it is only in our 
habit of doing so that the evidence, if so it may be 
called, of a geographical Denmark anterior to the time 
of Charlemagne has any existence. The habit of think- 
ing of the early Danes as if, in their character of pirates, 
they are easily traced to a definite district as the 
Algerines, is, no doubt, natural ; but it is fraught with 
error when, instead of thinking about Denmark as we 
do of Algiers, on the strength of our knowledge of it as 
a country, we argue from our knowledge of it as it was 
in the time of Charlemagne, or even of Alfred. What 
has been said about its language applies to its geogra- 
phy. As the language must be held to have become 
differentiated subsequent to the Angle invasion, the 
area must be held to have extended itself. The Danes 
are known on foreign shores long before they are known 
on their own. That they are, in the first instance, 
Germans; that they are Germans of the northern 
known extremity of Germany ; that they are Gemoans 
of the Angle frontier ; that they lay to the north of 
that frontier ; that their history is of the same character 
as that of the Angles — ^are fair inferences from the little 
we know about them. But there is nothing in all this 
that carries them beyond the Eyder, nothing that car- 
ries them into Jutland, nothing which makes them 


old occupants of the present kingdom, any more than 
there is anything which makes the Angles old occu- 
pants of Britain. The Danes, who are specially said to 
have been the first of the denomination in our island, 
land in a part which is pre-eminently iVbn-Danish. 
They are recorded in the composition essentially be- 
longing to the area of the iVim-Danish dialect. The 
notice is at least a hundred years later than the event. 
The name after the time of Alfred is suflBciently fami- 
liar, but even then there is no notice of the country 
from which they came ; and of their language no notice 
from first to last. 

§ 169. Beda, though ho enumerates the languages of Britain, makes 
no mention of the Danish. This, according to the view of those who 
hold that the notice of the Anglosazon Chronicle excludes all Danes 
anterior to a-d. 787, is accounted for by the fiict of there being none in 
the island. The present writer holds that Beda made no difference be- 
tween the Danish and the Angle. 

Again, the Anglosaxon Chronicle, though it lands its Danes in the 
Westsaxon parts of Britain, says that the land they made their descent 
on was English, But this only t«lls us that the name England^ when 
the entry was made, was extended from the Northern and Middle dis- 
tricts to the Southern. 

More important is the notice by Jomandes of Scandinaria, i.e. 
Norway and Sweden. It cannot be denied that he gives us Germans in 
Norway. The names Finnaithae^ Haumariciaef and Ragnaricii, are 
not only the present names Finheide, liomerige^ and Hingerige, but 
are compounds of the German word heide*»heath, and 'ric^kingdom^ 
domain. MorooTor the king^s name was Hodulf, who left his own 
kingdom to put himself under the protection of Theodoric the king of 
Goths. The blood of some of these men of German race (the general 
population was Fin) was the same as that of the Danes of Procopius. 
Now the most that can bo got from the statement is that, a little 
earlier than the recorded invasion of the Angles under Ida, but not 
earlier than the earliest inferential invasions of the Saxons, there was a 
German invasion of Norway nearly simultaneous with one of England; 
the name of the invaders being * Danes * in one case, and Angles in the 

Upon two of these three points, the only ones in which I see the ele- 
ments of an objection in the way of history, as I do not care to explain 


them aymj, I submit the\n to the judgment of the reader without com- 
mont. The text, howeyer, of Jornandes requires a fuller notice. 

After giving several names of less importance, that writer con- 
tinues : * Simt et his exteriores Ostrogotha^ Raumaricii, Ragnaricii, 
Finni mitissimi, Scandzise cultoribus omnibus mitiores, necnon et 
pares eorum Yinoviloth. Suithidi, cogcni (al. cogniti) in hac gente 
leliqms corporibus eminentiores, quamvis et Dani ex ipsorum stirpe 
progreui [qut\ Herulos propriis sedibus expulerunt Qui inter omnes 
Scandzise nationes somen sibi ob nimiam proceritatem affectant pr»- 
cipuum. Sunt quanquam et illorum positura Grannii, Agandzie, 
Unixse, Ethelrugi, Aiochiranni, quibns non ante multos annos Kodulf 
rex fuit : qui contemto proprio regno ad Theoderici Gothorum regis 
gremium confugit, et, ut desiderabut, invenit. Had itaque gentes 
Eomanis corpore et animo grandiores, infests ssevitia puguse/ — Jk 
Rebus Geiicis, c. 8. (Zettss, p. 502, p. 503.) 

§ 170. Eodolf s retreat to the bosom of Theodoric is 
earKer than the time of Ida in Northumberland ; but 
not much. The contact of the Heruli with the Danes is 
found in Procopius as well as Jornandes ; and Procopius 
is the better authority. His account is that the Heruli 
fled to the Wami, and skirted (? the Greek is wap^ 
Spafiov) the nations of the Danes. Jornandes, somewhat 
differently, makes the Danes expel the Heruli. The con- 
flict between the two texts is of less importance than 
the place it gives to the Danes. They are on the fron- 
tier of the Wami, in Mecklenburg; who are, them- 
selves, on that of the Angle in Altmark. The Angle 
district is a March. The Danish the same. The Angle 
district abutted on the German Ocean rather than on 
the Baltic : the Danish on the Baltic rather than the 
German Ocean. One pointed more especially towards 
Britain ; the other towards the Danish Isles : but, at 
the neck of the Cimbric Chersonese the two divisions 
would touch each other ; and each might join in the 
expeditions of its neighbour. On the one side the one 
name, on the other the other, might predominate. 
And this seems to have been the case. Where, in the 
Twelfth Century, we get the early accounts of Denmark, 


though much in them is mythic, one point seems real, 
viz., that the Danish kingdom began not in Holstein, 
Sleswick, or Jutland, but in the Islands, and extended 
itself to Skaane, the most Southern part of the Scan- 
dinavian Peninsula, at least as early as it did to Jut- 
land. This means that it spread not Northwards, but 
North-east. Dan, the brother of Angul, is, of course, 
a mere Eponymus ; but his brother is the Eponymus of 
England— and that in the eyes of the Danes. That 
Jutland was not Denmark, and that the kingdom of 
Dan consisted of the Islands before it embraced Jutland, 
is the unanimous statement of the earliest Danish logo- 

Again — as to the limitation of the original Den- 
mark to a comparatively small district on the Angle 
frontier, we have the following evidence in favour of 
reducing its dimensions. When Holstein is first known 
in detail, the eastern half is Slavonic and the western 
is Frisian ; in other words, there is no continuous 
extension of the Danish language in the central Penin- 
sula. There is a Danish March, or boundary ; but it 
was not so called because it was the frontier of a king- 
dom behind it, but a March which extended its name 
to a kingdom subsequently established. 

Taking this and the dates, we find it difficult to 
believe that, in the fifth and sixth centuries, the 
difference between the Angle districts and the Danish 
was either that of two great national areas, or that of 
two languages which differed from one another as the 
Scandinavian class of languages now differ from the 

§ 171. The exact details of the language we assign 
to this district are of minor importance, and, if they 
were not so, they would lie beyond our means of investi- 
gation. The name, too, or names, is unknown. The 


speech itself may have been absolutely uniform ; may 
have fidlen into two dialects ; or may have Mien into 
more than two. For the present inquiry, however, the 
following conditions are all that is needful : — 

(1) That it should be common to the two denomi- 
natioDs, Angle and Dane. 

(2) That it should contain the elements out of 
which two languages as unlike as the Northumbrian 
and the Old Norse of the Twelfth Century (the time 
when they can, for the first time, be compared) could 
be developed, when separated from one another by the 
German Ocean, and with (say) five centuries allowed 
for the changes on each side to be effected. 

(3) That, though more akin to the Angle than to the 
Westsaxon, it should be intelligible to both the West- 
saxons and the Mercians. This is because, at no time 
in English history, is the Danish treated as a separate 
language, any more than, in spite of certain differences 
of dialect, the Westsaxon and Angle are so treated. 

§ 172. Corollary. — From this last condition the 
corollary in respect to the dialects and sub-dialects of 
the German both of England and the Continent is that, 
though the differences between them were appreciable, 
they lay within a smaU compass; for when forms of 
speech like those of the northern and southern frontiers 
of Germany are found to be mutually intelligible, and 
(as such) little more than dialects of a single language, 
the presumption is that the intermediate dialects are 
the same. It need not be so ; but such is the presump- 
tion. This applies to the districts on the western half 
of Germany rather than to those of the south-east, of 
which, in the way of language, less is known. 




§ 173. It is usual to divide the English language 
into what is called its several stages ; and the word is 
a convenient one. The English of Henry VIII.'s time 
is older, or earlier, than that of the present day — ^not 
only in date, but in structure. And, in like manner, 
the English of the reign of King John is newer, more 
modem, or later, than that of the time of Alfred; 
and here we have, as we expect, a similar antiquity of 
structure. We have not only words which are now 
obsolete, but inflections which have now disappeared. 

It is by these internal and structural characters 
rather than by the mere number of years that the age 
of a language must be measured ; and it is a great gain 
if we can divide its history into clear and definite 
stages of growth or development. However, we cannot, 
from the very nature of the process of either growth 
or decay, expect that any very definite lines of demar- 
cation can be drawn ; though we know what terms 
are likely to present themselves. There will be an 
Older English, and a Newer, or Modem, English ; per- 
haps a Middle, an Intermediate, or a Transitional 
English — perhaps much more of the same kind. But, 
whatever may be the name, the relations of the divi- 
sions to one another will be the same. 

§ 174^ The classification, and nomenclature, which 
satisfied the scholars of the last generation, are as 
follows : — 

(1) The Period ; extending from the first introduc- 
tiosi of our language into Britain to the Battle of 



Hastings. Practically, this begins with the times of 
Beda, a.d. 725 {ca.) 

(2) From the Norman Conquest to the Middle of 
the Thirteenth Century — a.d. 1258. This is a very 
artificial division. However, a Proclamation to the 
people of Huntingdon of Henry III., for this year, has 
the credit of being the first example of what may be 
called the English to which the present language 
belongs rather than the English of the Anglosaxon 
period. This division is, we repeat, wholly artificial ; 
but as it is generally known to be so, it has been 
allowed to keep its place ; though with some limita- 
tions on its strict import. 

(3) From the Middle of the Thirteenth Century to 
the time of Chaucer ; which means the latter part of 
the reign of Henry III., that of Edward I., Edward II., 
and (partly) that of Edward III. This, again, is mainly 
determined by the importance of the name of Chaucer. 
Still it is, to a great extent, natural. 

(4) From Chaucer to Sir Thomas More. With 
Thomas More the present literature of England is, 
somewhat loosely, said to begin. Nevertheless, the 
name is sufficiently conspicuous to make the division 

>xr} (5) From the time of Henry^II. to the present. 

' § 175. Such are the dimensions of the five stages 

of the English language as generally understood. The 
names of them are as follows : — (1) AngloosLKon, (2) 
flfemisaxon, (3) Old English, (4) Middle English, (5) 
NeweTj Recent, or Modem English. 

Partly on the strength of the divisions themselves, 
and partly on account of the names, there is, at present, 
a good deal of criticism afloat, which is by no means 
favourable to the preceding nomenclature. 

§ 176. In respect to the names the chief objections 


lie against the first two — ^the compounds of the word 
Saxon. The history of the English language is contin- 
uous ; and as the word Saxon seems to indicate a differ- 
ent language, rather than the same language in a dif- 
ferent stage, it is charged with disguising the continuity. 
Perhaps with some persons it may do so. But then the 
substitute for it does something, perhaps, as bad. Old 
English, for that is the proposed name, disguises the 
continuity between the Old Saxon of the Continent 
and the insular Saxon of what is now England, but 
what was originally Britain. 

§ 177. Those who object to ^Anglosa^xon* object 
also to ^ Semisaocon ; ' as is natural. It is not likely, 
however, that the question of names will be deter- 
mined on any a priori notions of propriety. The 
name that turns out to be the most convenient will be 
the one which eventually prevails, and of this common- 
sense test those who make the most use of it in their 
investigations are the best judges. A name that is 
good in one department of learning may be exception- 
able in another. ' Okl English ' may be a good term 
for the historian, though an inconvenient one in philo- 
logy. Of this the historian and the philologue are the 
b^t judges, and each, as a workman in a different de- 
partment, has a right to name his tools. This is as 
much as need be said upon a point which, just at 
present, is invested with more importance than it 

§ 178. Oneof the reasons for the present objections 
to older classification and its corresponding nomen- 
clature is the importance which within the last thirty 
years has been attached to the study of our Dialects ; 
and when it comes to be generally recognized that each 
of the leading ones is represented by a corresponding 
literature, limited to its own proper period, there is so 


little continuity in their history that the impropriety 
of massing them together and treating them as one 
and indivisible is manifest. 

Another reason is the extent to which the history of 
the Middle English has been cultivated. The more we 
know of it the more we see how one period graduates 
into another, and how diflScult it is to draw definite 
lines of demarcation. 

Nevertheless, there is something akin to the stages 
of a language in general, or certain epochs at which the 
language in mass of the whole island was, or might be, 

Such a one is the time from the reign of Diocletian, 
at the end of the third century, to the middle of the 
fifth, when we know that some Germans of some sort 
or other had set foot in our island. 

Such a one is the time from the middle of the fifth 
century to the beginning of the seventh, when the 
history of our language was a blank. But we know 
that it was to a great extent German. 

Such a one was the time from a.d. 600 to the death 
of Beda ; for which we have a few lines in English, and 
these we know belong to the northern rather than to 
the southern form of speech. 

Such a one is the time from the death of Beda to 
that of Alfred, where we know that the northern litera- 
ture is declining. Under Alfred and his successors the 
classical Weatsaxon literature was formed. But a 
fresh 4nfluence was introduced by the Norman Con- 

From the Norman Conquest to the death of 
Richard II. there is a period out of which many 
subordinate stages may be made. There are the reigns 
of the two Williams, Stephen, Henry II., Bichard, and 
John, in which the Westsaxon still is the predomiiuir 


ting dialect; but there is very little of it. Then, 
under Henry III., there are compositions other than 
Westsaxpn. Those that are Northumbrian are repre- 
sentatives of an old, though diminished literature, in a 
new shape after a long arrest. Hence we have the 
Northumbrian form of speech re-appearing, but with 
no continuity in its history. 

There are, also. Midland dialects, which are repre- 
sented in this century, but they have no anterior 

Meanwhile the Westsaxon declines. 

For this period there is no continuity for any one 
of the forms of speech of which the English language 
consists; nor can we expect one of the language in 

§ 179. As early as 1852 a writer (Professor Stephens 
of Copenhagen) in the * Gentleman's Magazine' for 
April and May proposed the following change : viz. 

1. From JLD. 550 to 1150 the Language should be calle<l Oid 

2. From a.d. 1150 to 1350 the Language should be called Earij/ 

3. From jld, 1350 to 1550 the Language should be called Middle 

§ 180. Of this arrangement, with its corresponding 
system of terms, it is only certain that it is now on its 
trial ; also that from the time of its first introduction to 
the present it has had good authorities in its favour. Nor 
can it be denied that to a looker-on it has much to re- 
commend it. It is invested with a certain patriotic 
or national halo of what we may call Anglehood ; and 
it favours, to a certain extent, the notion that if the 
history of language, or, indeed, of anything else is con^ 
iinuouSj no term that has the slightest tendency to 


disguise that great fact of continuity should be tole- 
rated. I have no means of ascertaining how far the 
word Anglosaxon does this ; but I can easily imagine 
that many a person who has heard of it as the name of 
one language, and of English as that of another, may get 
exaggerated views as to the nature of their diflference. 
But unless he know that there is such a thing as a lan- 
guage with certain stages, periods, or consecutive divi- 
sions in its history, the words Old, MidcUe, and New, as 
qualifying additions to the word EngUah in the newer 
vocabulary, teach him but little ; and when he knows 
this a change is unimportant. Moreover, whatever may 
be said against the term Semisaxon, the word Anglo^ 
saxon is anything but a new one. 

As for the continuity which it is supposed to conceal, 
it is one of a very partial, or sectional, character ; for 
it extends no farther than the Angle conquest of 
Britain. The continuity of the Old English of Eng- 
land with the Old Saxon of Germany is as real as that 
of the English of Alfred's time with that of the Con- 
queror, and as well worth being made immistakeable. 
But, in the opinion of the present writer, the extent to 
which either is misunderstood is over-rated. However, 
as has been already stated, one word may be the best for 
the historian, the other for the philologue ; and each 
is the judge in his own department. 

Meanwhile it is well to know that such evil as the 
use of the compound ^ Anglosaxon^ is supposed to 
have done, is not involved in the term itself, and that 
the charge against it is not so much that it is a bad 
word in itself, but that English is a better. 

§ 181. Still it is a word that needs explanation; 
for it is not a new one, and it is one which has several 

(1.) The sense in which it is not only unexception- 


able, but almost necessary, is that with which we find 
it in the Lombard historian of the ninth century — 
Paulus Diaconus. He is not the author who gives us 
the earliest instance of its use ; but the import he 
attaches to it is the most definite. With him it means 
the ETiglish of BrUam, or the Island, as opposed to 
the English of Oermanyj or the mother-country of 
the Continent. For a Continental writer such a com- 
pound was excellent. 

(2) With Beda, an earlier writer, it has the same 
want of precision as it has now. Few who use it at 
the present time are able to say at once whether they 
mean by it Angle and Saxon, or Angle or Saxon. 
With the exact sense of Paulus Diaconus, Beda would 
have no great occasion to use it ; for with him, as an 
Anglosaxon, there would, in general, be nothing excep- 
tional in the term. Whether it meant Angle rather 
than Saxon, or Saxon rather than Angle, it would, 
as a matter of course, be English, Beda used all 
three terms — Angle, Saxon, and Anglosaxon. He 
also uses Old Saxon=Antiqui Saaones translated 

§ 182. In neither of these senses can the com- 
pound be abandoned. 

As opposed to the Old Saxon of the Continent, the 
Anglosaxon is the Anglosaxon of Paulus Diaconus. 

This is the compound in its most precise and un- 
exceptionable form. But it is wanted with a second 
sense. Though there was a imity between the Angles, 
Saxons, or Anglosaxons of Britain, there was also a 
difference, and not an unimportant one. At times we 
can analyse this, and show what was Angle and what 
was Saxon. But, at times, the separation is either 
beyond our means of analysis, or not requiring it. In 
this case, An^flosaxon, meaning neither An^le or 


Saxmi in particular, but both in general, is, to say the 
least, a convenient term. In the matter, however, of 
language or dialect, Westsaxon has become a recog- 
nized term. 

But it is only a geographical one ; and as such applies 
to a particular dialect of our language rather than to 
the stages of the language in general. For the period 
anterior to the Norman I have found Angloaaxon the 
most convenient name. 



§ 183. It is conspicuously clear from what has pre- 
ceded that just as the Westsaxon, the Northumbrian, 
and the Mercian are divisions of the English, so is the 
English a division of some larger group ; a group 
which some call OothiCj some Oerman. There is no 
doubt as to its contents. The languages or Dialects 
which are here stated to belong to it are universally ad- 
mitted to do so. Upon their relations, however, to 
each other, or the divisions and subdivisions which they 
form within the class at large, there is no unanimity of 
opinion. The Table of Affinities which satisfied the 
generation of Grimm and Sask was as follows : — 





CMcuch Gothic 

I Literary Gennan 
Hessian, &c. 

<L(Ho German 





Piatt Deutsch, &c. 


Ths English Language^ p. 213. 

Halgoland, &c 

Here the Mcesogothic stands by itself. 

The classification of the last work of importance 
and authority, Dr. Morris's ^Historical Outlines of 
English Accidence^ runs thus : — 

The Teutonic languages may be arranged in three groups as sub- 
dirisions — 

(1) The Low German. (2) The Scandinavian. (3) The High 

L To the Low German belong the following languages— 

(1) Gothic, &c 

(2) Frisian, &c 

(3) Dutch, &c. 

(4) Flemish, &c. 
(6) Old Saxon, &c. 

(6) English, (a) Old English ; (h) Modem English ; (c) Pro- 
vincial English ; {d) Lowland Scotch. 

IL To the Scandinavian division belong the following languages : 
(1) Icelandic; (2) Norwegian; (3) Swedish; (4) Danish. 

III. To the High Gbrmaic division belongs Modem German, the 
literary dialect of Germany, properly the speech of the south-east of 
Germany, Bavaria, Austria, and some adjacent districts. 

It is divided into three stages — 

(a) Old High German, comprising a number of dialects (the 
Thuringian, Franconian, Swabian, Alsacian, Swiss, and 
Bavarian), spoken in Upper or South Germany, from the 
beginning of the eighth to the middle of the eleventh 

(6) Middle High German, spoken in Upper Germany fh»m tha 


beginning of the twelfth to the end of the fifteenth cen- 
(c) Modem High German, from the end of the fifteenth century 
to the present time. 
Liither ennobled the dialect he used in his beautiful translation of the 
Bible, and made the High German the literary language of all German- 
speaking people. The Low German dialects of the Continent are yield* 
ing to its influence, and, in course of time, will be wholly displaced 
by it. 

10. If we compare English and Modem German we find them rery 
clearly distinguished from each other by regular phonetic changes: 
thus &d in English corresponds to a t in German, as dance and tanr ; 
dat/ and ta^ ; deep and tie/ ; drink and trinken. A ^ in English agrees 
with tin 8 or z in German, as is shown by foot and fuss ; tin and zinn ; 
to and eu ; two and gwei ; water and wasser. A German di% equiva- 
lent to our thy as die and the ; dein and thine ; bad and hath, &c. 

Not only English, but all the remaining members of the Low German 
family, as well as the Scandinavian dialects, are thus distinguished 
from High German.— Pp. 4-6, J 872. 

Here the Moesogothic is made Low German ; there- 
by isolating the High German, and making it excep- 
tional to the general character of the Family. The 
principle upon which this is done is explained in the last 
four sentences. It is founded on the letter-changes indi- 
cated, and, to some extent, illustrated, in §§ 124, 125, 
viz., the change of the Sonant Mutes to the Surd. That 
it is not general has been shown. Still it is a change 
of a regular and systematic character, and as such must 
be taken as we find it. But only so fer as it goes ; that 
is, so far as there are no signs of affinity elsewhere. 

That there actually are such that connect the Moeso- 
gothic with the High German is beyond doubt ; so that 
the result is the paradox or see-saw, that though the 
changes under notice may associate a given form of 
speech with the Low German dialects, it may not sepa- 
rate them from the High ones ; and this is only another 
way of saying that between the value of High and Low 
as divisions, and the value of the change of Sonant to 
ISurd as a criterion, the value of the characteristic 
which makes a cross-division of the kind before us is 


cjoestioiiable. In fact, the change under consideration 
Is a single character^ and single characters are prover- 
bially suspicious. To be of any value they must come 
Under one of two conditions. They must either be of 
Bach importance of themselves as to outweigh a mass 
of minor differences, and no one has shown that the 
change from Sonant to Surd does this, or they must, 
80 to say, carry with them, imply, or represent other 
'H diflFerences with which they are connected in the way 
'' of cause and effect, or as parts of a systematic series of 
', ■ changes, in which case they are not single characters. 
The difference between the change from Surd 
to Sonant was not a matter of such importance in 
^ the eyes of the older philologues as it is with us. 
With us it is important because in the particular 
case of the High and Low German forms of speech it 
admirably exemplifies what is called Grimm's Law. 
But it does not follow that because it did this, it 
" should be a good measure of the nearness or distant- 
Dess of the relationship between one language and 
another. The change may and does exist between 
closely allied forms of speech. But it drew attention 
to a change which the older scholars had either over- 
looked or undervalued. 

When High and Low^ however, became precise, 
technical, important, and generally current terms, the 
Low German character of the Moesogothic Phonesis 
commanded attention ; and more than thirty years ago 
Kemble drew attention to it. Still it was kept sepa- 
rate in the systems of classification. At present it is 
not only classed as Low German, but specially, some- 
times ostentatiously, separated from the High. 

The real question in all this is the merit of the 
^ terms High and Low as names of classes, and the value 
of the change from Surd to Sonant as a test. 

As for the Moesogothic, so far as its PboTic%\s ^gc)^^ 



it is, quoad hoc. Low German. It may be so in other 
matters ; but until it is not only shown to be so, but 
shown to be so in more points, or more important ones 
than those wherein it agrees with the High German, 
the unattached condition in which the older Scholars 
left it should be upheld ; and the proof that the Mcbso- 
gothic and High German are in diflferent and distant 
divisions proves too much. 

§ 184. But the tabular arrangement is not the only 
one. In the only other English grammar of import- 
ance, that of Mr. March, we have a Genealogical Tree. 
After mentioning the Anglosaxon and the Danish the 
author writes : — 

* The other languages sprung from the languages of Low German 
tribes are Friesic, Old Saxon, and, later, Dutch (and Flemish), and 
Piatt Deutsch . . . These Low German languages are akin to the High 
German on one side, and to Scandinavian on the other. These with the 
Moesogothic constitute the Teutonic class of languages.' 

This leaves the Moesogothic by itself. 

* The following stem shows the manner in which the Teutonic lan- 
guages branch after separating from the Teutonic The Gothic (Moeso- 
gothic) died without issue. The Gothic (Mcesogothic) is nearer akin to 
it than the High German is. The branches of the Scandinavian (Swed- 
ish, Danish, and Norwegian) are not represented. 

I Tc 

A Teutonic. Theoretic 
a Gothic. 4th Century 
h Germanic. Theoretic 
c Scandinavian. 13th Century 
d High German. 8th Centuiy 
e Jjoyr Gorman. Theoretic 
/ Frisian. 14th Century 
ff Saxon. Theoretic 
h Anglosaxon. 8th Century 
t Old Saxon. 9tli Century 
k Piatt Deutsch. 14th Centuiy 
I Dutch. 13th Century.' 
A Comparative Grammar qf tk$ JnjfUh 
saxon Lamgwigi* 187L 


Here the MoBsogothic, though not classed as either 
High or Low^ is said to be more ' like ' the latter than 
the former. But it branches off from the main stem at 
a nearer point than the Old Saxon does ; while the con-s 
tinuation of the stem, though marked as ^ Low German," 
is also marked as Theoretic. 

This shows that an arrangement which classes lan- 
guages, at a late period of their growth, may conflict 
with one that shows them in their earlier relations 
to a common stock. Both are incomplete. Provided, 
however, that we know this, and take each system for 
what it is intended, and for no more than it is worth, 
the evils are not very serious ; for one checks the other, 
and classifications of such an absolute nature as to 
allow each of their characteristics to be driven to its 
extreme results are rarely attainable. It is one thing to 
make the Mcesogothic Low in respect to its Phonesis, 
another to make it, when its other characteristics are 
brought in on the other side, more Westsaxon than 
High German. 

§ 185. The Indo-Oermanicj cfcc. Class of Lan- 
guage. — But, as the English was only a single member 
in the German family, so was the German itself but a 
single member of a higher group, viz., Indo-Germanic, 
Indo-European, or Aryan. In a systematic work on 
Philology it would be necessary to discuss the relative 
merits of these three names ; and to ascertain the 
dimensions of the class; but this is not necessary here. 
Such members of it as will be used for the illustration 
of the details of English Philology — these and these 
only — will be here mentioned. 

I. Nearest in geography, but not so much used as 
the others in illustration, is the Slavonic. This con- 
tains: — 

a. The Polish, with outlying fragments in other 


parts of Gennany dating from a time when Slavonia 
extended to and beyond the Elbe. These are : — 

6. The Linonian of Lnneburgh, in which the 
original Slavonic was preached during the last century. 
Known only by a Paternoster. 

c. The Kassubic; still spoken by a fragmentary 
population in Pomerania. 

d. The Sorabian, a remnant of the Slavonian of 
Lusatia and Brandenburg. 

e. The Bohemian, called Czekh (Tshekh) in Bohe- 
mia ; Moravian in Moravia ; and Slovack in Upper 

/. The Sussian. 

g. The Bulgarian. 

h. The Servian : where this ends it is difficult to 
say. It is well separated from the Bulgarian in the 
East ; but where it ceases in the direction of Croatia, 
Carniola, and Dalmatia, is indefinite. 

II. The Lithuanic ; comprising the Lithuanic of 
Lithuania, and parts of East Prussia; the Old Prus- 
sian ; the Lett, or Lettish, of Courland, Livonia, and 

III. The Latin ; with its old dialects Umbrian and 
Oscan, and its modem derivatives, the Italian, the 
Spanish and Portuguese ; the French, both Northern 
and Southern (or Provenjal); the Bomain of the Dan- 
ubian Principalities; Bukhovinia; part of Transyl- 
vania ; and Bessarabia ; and, lastly, the Bomance of 
the Swiss Grrisons (Grraubiinten). 

IV. The Greek, Ancient and Modem. 

V. The Sanskrit, with its congeners and deriva- 
tives, whatever they may be ; for upon this point there 
is no complete agreement of opinion. 

That there are other languages assigned to the class 
under notice has been already indicated; more especially 


the Celtic and the Albanian. In a work upon Compara- 
tive Philology it would be necessary to go into this 
question ; but, in the present, the main reason for saying 
about them the little that has been said is the fact that 
they are continually referred to as languages illustra- 
tive of the structure of our own. That the Celtic, Al- 
banian, and others may do the same is true ; but they 
don't do it to the same extent. Hence they may be 
Indo-Germanic, Indo-European, or Aryan, but they 
are not so in respect to their application in English 

§ 186. Synthesis and Analysis. — ^The general 
character of our dialects in respect to their change of 
structure from Synthetic to Analytic is a point of more 
importance. One and all, they are more Synthetic in 
their older stages than in the newer ones. There is 
always change of some kind, thougli it goes on in the 
different languages at different rates ; but whether the 
changes be quick and firequent, or few and far between, 
the general direction is the same throughout, viz., 
from Synthesis to Analysis, and not vice versa. 






§ 187. In most languages there is a difference be- 
tween the actual pronunciation of words in speakmg 
and the representation of them, by written signs or 
letters, in apeUvng ; and in English this difference is 
inordinately great. 

Hence, when we investigate the nature of the ele- 
mentary articulate sounds of our language, the eye mis- 
leads the ear. Thus — 

(a) The sounds of the PA, as in Philip^ and the 
/ as in JilUpy diflfer to the eye ; while, to the ear they 
are the same. Here, then, a real likeness is concealed, 
and an artificial difference suggested. 

(b) The sound of the th^ as in thiuj differs from 
that of the th in thine. Yet to the eye the two sounds 
are alike. Here a fictitious likeness is suggested, and 
a real difference is concealed. 

Besides this, the Names of the Letters as we find 
them in the Alphabet, for the most part, mislead us ; 
the only exceptions being Bee and Pee, Dee and Tee, 


These, though they fidl to give us the exact relations 
of b and J9, or d and t, as sounds, do not altogether con- 
ceal it, as names like ka and gee^ eff and vee do. If 
we wish, however, to thoroughly understand the matter, 
we must trust nothing to the na/mes of the letters^ 
but everything to the sounds themselves, and to no- 
thing else. This means that even from names so 
simple as Bee, Pee, Dee, or Tee, we must cut off the 
vowel, and tuKMistom ourselves to pronounce the simple 
uncombincd sounds of the consonant. We must do 
this in spite of their consonantal character, and in spite 
of the statement that a consonant cannot be sounded 
without a vowel to support it. Without a vowel con- 
sonants will not readily combine into syllables; but, 
without a vowel they can be pronoimced separately ; 
and so every one who wishes to make a study of the 
mechanism of speech must bring himself to pronoimce 
them. It is easy to see that p and b are allied sounds ; 
easy, too, that t and d are allied ; and not difficult 
to see that Hs to j9 as & to (2, and vice versa. K and 
b when similarly examined are in the same condition. 
This is a point upon which any one who chooses to con- 
vince himself may do so ; for the machinery is not only 
always at hand, but every ordinary Englishman has 
the full command of it. When, however, we take to 
the TiaTTies, we find that though words like pee or bee 
may not do much towards concealing an affinity, words 
like hay and gee may do it most effectively. 

§ 188. In counting the number of our elementary 
sounds it is necessary to have clear views ^ to the prin- 
ciple upon which we treat such varieties as the a in 
father, fate, fat, <SS:c. Are they to be counted as three 
distinct elements or as so many modifications of a 
single sound; in other words, are there in English 
three a's, or one a with three powers ? 



It is found convenient to count them as three sepo' 
rate sounds. 

If so, the number of the elementary Articulate 
Soimds, of the literary, standard, or classical English, 
amounts to thirty-four; and if we add to these the 
Diphthongs and the sounds of ch and j, to forty. 

Simple Sounds. 

§ 189. The Vowels. — 1-12. These are the vowels in 
f other, fate, fat ; bed,feetjtm; cool^fuU; bawljTiotej 
not; but. Whoever isolates these, pronounces them 
slowly, and pays attention to the condition of his 
tongue, teeth, and cheeks, during the utterance of 
them, will find that the passage of air firom the lungs to 
the outer atmosphere is permanently firee or open, there 
being no point where either the tongue tfmches the 
palate, or where the lips close on one another. They 
are farthest apart in the a in father ; and they are 
nearest to one another in the oo in cool ; but the column 
of air which forms them, though narrowed, is never 
arrested, the sound being capable of prolongation, or 

The sounds thus formed constitute the class of 
Vowels — twelve in number. 

§ 190. The Liquids. — 13-16. The sounds of f, m, 
nj and r, as in lowj mow, n/), row. 

Here the tongue and lips play a part. The tongue 
is either applied to the palate, or vibrates upon it, or 
else the lips are closed. In either case, however, 
there is contact between the upper and under parts of 
the mouth so that the soimd is checked, arrested, or 
diverted. With m the lips are closed, and the column 
of air escapes, not through the mouth, but through the 
nostrils. The sound of n also escapes through the. nos- 
trils ; but, instead of the passage through the mouth 


being closed by the lips, it is closed by the tongue, 
which is pressed against the fore part of the palate. 
With r the tongue vibrates on the palate ; and with I it 
toaches the palate on one side so as to divert the stream 
of air to the other. All these sounds, like the Vowels, 
can be prolonged ; or, in other words, are Continuous. 
They constitute the class of Liquids — ^four in number. 

§ 191. The Semivowels. — 17-18. The sounds of 
the y in yet, and w in weli. These are treated as single 
sounds; though they are more properly Diphthongs, 
since yet is little more than e-et ; s^nd weli little more than 
oo~elj the prefixes e and u being pronounced so quickly 
as to coalesce with the vowel that follows. It is con- 
venient, however, to treat them as single. They consti- 
tute the class of Semivowels — ^two in number. 

§ 192. The Sibilants.— 19-22. The soimds of the 
s in seed, and the z in zeai, the sh in shin, and the z 
(zh) in azure. Here the passage of air is diverted by 
the contact of the tip of the tongue with the palate. 
All these sounds can be prolonged or continued, like 
the hissing of a serpent, with which the sound of s has 
been compared. They form the class of Sibilants — 
four in number. 

These sounds aro the easiest of all the Consonantal ones, to be iso- 
lated. In words like hiss, hush^ buzz, whizz, &c., they constitute the 
characteristic part of the word, or that element through which the sound 
in certain words becomes a sort of * echo to the sense.' 

This makes the difference between the sounds of s and z intelligible. 
The sound of z is that of a whizz, or buzz, rather than that of a hias. 

This last, however, is not the ordinary pitch or tone of the human 
Toice in common conversation, but rather that of a conversation in whis- 
pers ; the pitch of z, on the other hand, being that of conversation in 

As all the sounds hitherto enumerated have been of this latter kind, 
the sounds of s and sk introduce a new term, or, rather, a new pair of 
terms ; the distinction upon which thoy are founded being that between 
hiss and a buzz, or ordinary voice and whispers, or sharpness and flat' 

246 MUTES. 

Now when s and z are thns contrasted it is clear that the sound of 
sh stands to that of 8 as that of zh (the z in azuret glazier , &e., and the 
French^*) does to that of z, and vice versd. Hence arises a pair of pain, 
or a quaternion. 

The Liquids are, also, fonr in number ; but they neither fall into 
the divisions that have just been indicated, nor are they so, decidedly, 
yarieties of a single fundamental form. For it is clear that we may if 
we like call z a vocalized «, or « a r reduced to a whisper. 

§ 193. The Sibilants, as has been already stated, ave Continuous ; and, 
in being this, they agree with aU the sounds that have preceded them. 

The next group, however, will contain sounds other than continuous, 
viz., a Pi b, t, dj and k. 

All these, so to say, explode. With everyone of them, either by the 
closure of the lips, or by the close contact of the tongue with the 
palate, the passage of the air is completely barred. With the Vowels 
it has been merely narrowed. With the Liquids and Sibilants it has 
been only partially closed ; for even when with m and n the closure of 
the firont part of the mouth was complete, the Tocalised column of air 
escaped by way of the nostrils, and the pair of Nasal Liquids was the 
result. The same diversion of the voice takes place with the Sibilants. 
But with Pi bf t, &c., the posterior nares as well as th^ outlet through 
the mouth are closed; and the air is pent up, as it were, behind a 
barrier formed by either the lips or tongue ; and as long as this lasts 
there is no sound at all. When, however, it is removed a sound escapes. 
But it escapes at once, and after the fashion of an explosion. Such is 
the case with the sounds of p, 5, t, d, &, g, as contrasted with those 
of /, Vf and tht which are as easily prolonged, or made continuous, as 
those of St shf Zj zh, or even as the Vowels themselves. 

§ 194. 23-32.— (a) The sounds of p, 6, /, and 
V, in pane, bane, faTie, and vane. — Four in number, 
and called Labials from the Latin lahium^ip; the 
organ most engaged in the formation of them. 

(6) The sounds of t, d, th, as in thvn^ and th 
(soimded dh\ as in thvne (pronoimced dhme)—Four 
in number and called Dentals, from the Latin den8=^ 
tooth, the dental region, or front of the palate, being 
the part upon which the tongue is more especially 
pressed in the formation of the valve, behind which the 
air is first confined, and through which it afterwards 

HUTBS. 247 

In each of these two quatemioiui there are the elements cf a doable 
azrangementy i.e. 

Explosive or Contiftuotu, 

Surd. Sonant, Swrd, Sonant. 

p. b, I /. V. 

t. d, I th. dk. 

Surd or Sonamt, 

SrpMee. Cautinuous, Explosive, Continuous, 

p, /. I ft. V. 

t. th. I d, dJk, 

The Sibilant series has no cUmble arrangement. 

(c) The soimds of the k in kill and the g in gim. — 
These are called PalcUaJsj the arch, or back of the 
palate being the most characteristic part of it. Still, 
the Dentals are, in a degree, palatal. 

(a) In the formation of the Dentals the tongue touches, or ap- 
proaches the teeth, in the firont of the palate, and this it does with its 

In the formation of the more special Palatals (k and ff) the tip of 
the tongue is depressed, the middle part of it being curved upwards, so 
as to touch the sqft or back palate, rather than the parts about the teeth 
and gums. 

(b) The Palatal, or Palatal Mutes, are, here, only itoo in number. 
This is simple, because the sounds which stand in the relation to k and 
g^sA f and v, th and dh^ta p and 6, t and d are wanting in our lan- 
guage, just as the sounds of th and dh are wanting in the French and 
German ; and indeed in the majority of languages. Unless we remem- 
ber this, the true character of the d^yision under notice escapes us. 

(e) The three groups of Labials, Dentals, and Palatals constitute 
the higher division of Mutes ; from which the Liquids and Semivowels 
bare always been separated, and with which it is time to leave off asso- 
ciating the Sibilants. 

Of the Sibilants, however, as we have seen, all are Continuous. Of 
the Mutes one half only is Continuous, the other half being Explo- 

I 196. The Semivowels are connected with thn Vowols, through 
i {ee) and «, the Consonants, by ff and v — t, y, ff, and «, 10, v. How- 
ever, between g and y the series is broken in English, because the 


Continuants of k and ff are wanting. Still ff is the nearest congener 

The Liquids are connected with the Sibilants and Mutes through — 
rtoz and s ; Itoff and k; nto d and i ; m to 6 and p. So fax as the 
Liquids, like the Vowels, are Sonant, the closest to the Liquids of the 
several pairs are z, g, d, and b — i.e. the Sonant, Sibilant, and the Sonant 

§ 196. The mechanism of the system of the Mutes is the most com- 
plex part of Fhonesis ; but it is easily leamt. Anyone, in any coun- 
tiy, who has a well-formed mouth and an average ear can teach himself 
— if he toiU. If he will not, no one else can teach him. By so doing he 
anticipates the operation of the so-called Bules of Euphony which are 
casually and occasionally inserted, and repeated, in the parts which treat 
of Etymology. The details themselves are important : but the fact that 
there is not only a system at all, but one of remarkable symmetry, is 
more so. 

It is, however, those details only which have an especial bearing upon 
our language that are noticed here. So far as a system is exhibited it 
is only exhibited as a means of giving unity to the details— on the 
principle that * The whole is easier than the part.' 

§ 197. (33) The sound of the letters -ng, as in 
Tdng^ song^ &c. — ^This is, by no means, the sound of ng^ 
but an indecomposable elementary articulation. 

^ is a Nasal, JY is a Nasal also ; but it is a Nasal Liquid. So 

With m the exit of the vocalized air is closed by the lips ; with n by 
the extremity of the tongue and the forepart of the palate ; with ng 
by the middle part of the tongue and the velum palate ng, Henoe^ ng 
is, in a certain sense, a Liquid ; and, in a certain sense, ng^ n, and m are 
Vowels. The passage for all three is through the nostrils, and the 
closure of the mouth, or the passages within it, is merely subordinate 
to the diverting of the column of vocalized air towards the nostrils. 
Within the Nasal cavities its passage is as unbroken as is the passage 
of the true Vowel through the mouth. The -«», -tn, -on, and -wi, in 
French, is more of a Vowel than a Consonant ; and so is the &> in 

Ng in English never begins a syllable. We say -mg and -on^, but 
not ngi and ngo ; though the latter form is, in some languages, initial 
as weU as final. This shows that sounds are not so much pronounce- 
able or the contrary by themselves, but are pronounceable or unpro- 
nounceable according to their relation to other sounds. 


§ 198. (34) The sound of the letter H.—This is a 
Breathing, rather than an Articulated Element of 
Speech. It passes through the mouth simply as 
Breath; or without being acted upon by any of the 
organs of Speech. Neither is it Sonant, but Surd. 
But p, f, tj &c., are Surd also : yet, still, articulations. 
This is because the tongue and lips act on them ; 
which with h are perfectly passive. 

§ 199. 

Compound Sounds. 

These are six in number — 


The Bound of the letters ou in house. 


M » «» 

„ new. 


„ letter % 

„ pine. 


„ letters oi 

„ voice. 


jf » eh 

t, chett (i.e. Uh), 


» j 

„ jest (i.e. 


These are, one and all, etymologicaUy Diphthongs ; 
the only difference being that the first four are made 
up of Vowels, the last two out of Consonants. The 
latter, however, will be called ' Compound Sibilants^ 
and the former ^ Diphthongs ' as usual. 

§ 200. The Organ of Vocalization. — ^This brings us 
to a point which has apparently been neglected. 

All that has hitherto been indicated can be made out 
by the student himself from tlie mere observation of the 
condition of the different parts of the mouth and nos- 
trils, dxiring the formation of the elementary sounds ; 
and though it is not quite so easy to know the relative 
position of the tongue, lips, and soft palate in ordinary 
speaking as it is to see the position of the fingers 
and thumb when we talk 'on our fingers,* it is not 
much harder. One point of the vocal organization, 
however, lies beyond, and below, the mouth, viz., the 


mechanism by which we form the Sonants as opposed 
to the Surds. 

This is done by the larynx (or Adam's apple), of 
which all that can be said in a work like the present is 
that it is an organ provided with elastic membranes, 
which can be made lax or tense by a system of small 
muscles by which they can be either tightened, relaxed, 
or left in a state of quiescence. When they are left 
quiescent the sound comes out as that of ordinary 
breath ; when they are tightened their vibration gives 
us Vocal, or Sonant, articulations. Something even of 
the larynx can be seen by means of the Laryngoscope ; 
but for the generality it is only the parts within the 
mouth that can be brought imder direct observation. 



§ 201 • The -a in father and the -^ir in farther. — 
These are generally sounded alike ; the process being 
generally, that the ^ar is sounded like the -a, rather than 
the -a like the -ar. When the converse takes place, and 
when Maridj or idea, is sounded Mariar, or idear (a 
recognised inelegancy), the mispronunciation is either 
due to early contact with persons who what is called 


< thrill the -Ty or to some early imperfection of speech 
which has been to a great extent, but not wholly, sur- 
monnted. In th^ first case they do it unconsciously ; in 
the latter with a slightly misdirected efifort. It has 
left its mark in our language. Daughter is foimd in 
Old English spelt dortor. The words near and hoarse 
are thus transformed ; for the true roots are hdsj or 
hoaae. Cockney rhymes, like morning and davmimgy 
are common ; and, if the sounds are really identical, 
may by excused if not defended. 

If we consider how prevalent the open soimd of the 
a is in other languages, the comparative rarity of it in 
English may surprise. But it is only the true open -a 
that is rare. The abusive, or catachrestic, form is com- 
mon. Not to mention the cases like -a, and -ati;, 
as in hawly how many of us, when beginning German, 
are perplexed with the difference between rrmTie and 
mei/nerl The single -6 in English is, as a rule, mute ; 
but in German we have to sound it ; and sometimes we 
do so. But in many cases we soimd the two words 
alike, i.e. mei/ner as meine, and not vice versa. 

The fiwt is that, when r follows a vowel, most of 
us never pronounce it at all. We may fancy we do, 
but we don't. We fancy we do because we find the -7' 
appears in the written language. 

I do not say that this softening or slurrmg of the 
-r is universal. It is certainly general. But it is 
South British, rather than Northumbrian. 

In the way of eridence on this point I give the following selected 
ftatement firom a writer who is not only a North Briton familiar with 
the language of the Sonth, bat one who, as a philologist, well knows 
what the aonnd of the -r really is, both in its attenuation and its exag- 

'B is in Scotch always a consonant, and in all positions trilled 
sharply with the point of the tongne, and nerer smoothly huzred or 
bnrivd, cor oonvertad into a mere glide as in Eoglish, nor rcllednixXx the 


whole length of the tongue as in Irish, nor roughly burrtd with tiM 
phaiynz as in Northumberland, in France and Germ&ny. Even the ini- 
tial English r, in roadt rung^ is softer and more gliding than the Seotdi, 
which is used with equal sharpness before or after a vowel, as in rwrt^ 
roar, raythery roarer. In the south of England its subsidence after a 
Towel into a more glide renders it impossible to distinguish, in the Qtte^ 
anco of some speakers, between law^ lore; lord, laud; gutta, gutter; 
Emmaf hemmer. Hence, when these words are used with a foUowing- 
vowel, a hiatus is avoided by saying draw-r-ing, Sarah-r-Anne, Maida- 
r-*ill, idea-r of things, law-r of England, phrases which even educated 
men are not ashamed, or not conscious, of uttering. No such libeiticf 
arc allowable with the Scotch r, which is always truly consonantaL*— 
Murray: Dialect of the Southern Counties of Scotland, p. 120. 

§ 202. Tlie Slender vowels e and i as opposed to 
the Broad ones, a, o, and u. — ^The bearing of this dif- 
ference is twofold ; (1) in respect to its influence on the 
double power of the letters c and g ; and (2) upon its 
determination of the Umlaut 

(a) A small vowel preceded by either C or G. — C 
before 6 or ^ is sounded as s ; before a, o, or u as t 
We know this from our first lessons in spelling, and 
this alone is sufficient to show the importance of the 

G before e or i is sounded as J, We know this 
also from the Spelling-book. 

We may put this in a more general form and say 
that when c=5, g=j* 

We must add, however, that though the principle 
of the change is the same, the details of the result are 
different. In both cases the Palatal is changed into a 
Sibilant or Assibilated. But with C the Sibilant is 
Simple ; with G Compound. 

(fc) Tlie Umlaut. — ^When, in either a Compound or 
a Derivative word, a syllable containing a slender vowel 
is either prefixed or appended to one containing a 
broad one, the broad one may be modified, and may 
become, if not actually slender, slenderer. 


Of this change, in some shape or other, most 
languages give us examples. There is less of it in 
English than elsewhere. The words ddei' and eldest 
as the Comparative and Superlative forms of oldj are 

§ 203. -B after a Liquid. — ^When any one of the 
other three Liquids is immediately followed by -r, or 
vice versdj when -r is immediately preceded by a 
Liquid, the combination is Unstable. It is, beyond all 
doubt, pronounceable. But it rarely lasts long without 
something being interposed, and so that the immediate 
contact of the two liquids is avoided. This interposed 
sound varies with the liquid which it follows. 

Beti^een I and r it is ff^-pUgrim £rom pterin. 
,t m and r „ b— number „ numeru9. 
„ n and r „ d — kindred „ kinred. 

In the word lawh^ the &, which is no part of the 
original, has thus been introduced. The plural was in 
-r, as in chUdeVj from child. The termination was 
dropped, the I retained, so that now it looks like a part 
of the fundamental word. 

§ 204. The cornbmation of ^8urd^ and ^SonantJ 
— ^Two Mutes of different degrees of Sonancy cannot 
immediately succeed one another in the same syllable ; 
a fiBUst which makes the thorough comprehension of the 
syBtem of mutes indispensable. 

It 11 not a matter of mero understanding. We maj understand that 
9 and 8 make 17 ; or we may know the Multiplication Table by heart ; 
but if fiims are to be done quickly, safely, and easily, we must be tho- 
roogUy familiar with the working of it. We must remember without 
an tSbrt that ^ is to d, as jp to 6, and k to y, and /to v, &c. ; and we 
eaa only do this when we have taught ourselves their relations. When 
we haTe done this, the Rules of Euphony are known beforehand ; and 
dedQctiom from them either anticipated or taken as a matter of course. 

Moreover, for the English language we must take the English ar- 
nuigement. The classical groups of Tetates, Media, and AtpiraUs^ if 
they don't peiples us, carry us but half way. 




Unless we do this we must pick them up as we find them in their 
special applications, and, so doing, pick them up laboriously and in- 
completely. A little practice and a little conversation to pnrselTes 
give ns the requisite &miliarity with them. 

This especially touches the formation of our Plural 
Numbers and Plreterit Tenses. Words like slabs, 
lives, pluckd (phicked), stoppd {stopped), may be 
vnriMen, but not pronounced. The sounds are slabz, 
llvz, pluckt, stopt, &c. The rule, however, is simple. 
When such conjunctions occur, one accommodates itself 
to the other, i.e. takes its degree of Sonancy. 

That the second adapts itself to the first, rather than the first to the 
second, or, changing the expression, that it is the first that determines 
the change, is due, in English, to the practice of the language. There 
is nothing to [preclude the opposite process ; and there are instances of 
it in English. The first 8 in howea, &c., is sounded as e {hoiuu). 
This is because the final, or appended Sonant acts upon the Suid of the 
fundamental word; i.e. acts backwards. In Scotland the form is 

§ 205. No true Aspirates m English. — The As- 
pirate never follows a consonant in the same syllable : 
such combinations as ph, th, and sh, and ch being mere 
points of spelling; and, by no means, the sounds of 
p-\'h, t-\-h, &c. 

The only words wherein we find a real sound of h 
preceded by a consonant are those compounds whereof 
the second element begins with -h — as hap-haaard, 
nut-liook, i/nk'hom. 

This limitation is not connected with the structure of language in 
general. The true sound of a Cpnsonant and an Aspirate is pronoance- 
able ; and, in some languages, is common. The English, however, is 
not one of them ; though, from our spelling, it looks as if it 

§ 206. No true Doubled Consonants in the same 
Syllable. — Identical consonants never follow one 
another immediately in the same syllable; in other 


words, are never doubled; such combinations as maaSj 
buzz, &C., being mere points of spelling. Crenerally, 
they show that the vowel which precedes is short. 
The only words wherein we find a real doubling of the 
consonant are (as with h) certain corn/pounds — e.g. 
wnrTUxturaly imr-Tiate, aavJ^lesSj booh-casej &c* 

Hub limitation is not connected with the stroctnre of language in 
genend. Two consecutiTe identical Consonanta are, as we have seen, 
pronoonceable. They are rare, however, in English ; though, &ora our 
spelling it looks as if they were common. 

A mute is changed into its corresponding Surd or Sonant (as the case 
may be) of the same organ, i.e. Labial into the correspondent Labial, a 
Dental into the coirespondent Dental, and a Palatal into the corre- 
spondent Palatal. Whether the first act upon the second or the second 
upon the first depends on the habit of the language. In English it 
is the last that is modified, and we say slabs, liver, ladz, bags ; though 
we might (only we do not) say slaps, Hfs, lats, baks. That there must 
be an aooommodation of some sort is a matter of necessity. 

§ 207. Unstable Combinations. — ^Tho Diphthong iw or ew is one of 
the beet instances in our language of an Unstable combination. We can 
pronounce it, and we can combine it with other sounds. But, with all 
this, it rarely keeps its place over the whole of a language. We find it at 
the beginning of a word in ewer ; and many pronounce it so. But it is 
certain that many sound it like your. Hew, as in * Sir Hew Daliymple,' is 
probably sounded according to the spelling ; but Hugh is often You, 
How many Humes are called Hewm, and how many Yume, is unknown, 
but the pronunciation is certainly divided. So, likewise, with ewer and 

We may now take the question from another point of view ; and 
attend only to the sounds of the vowel u. In most words, when long, 
it is sounded as a diphthong ; for whether we pronounce the word tune 
as tyoon or as tewn, we don't sound it as toon. Yet this last is the way 
in which we spell it when it is a long vowel. As for the short u, it is 
sounded, with few exceptions, such &8full, pull, anO others, like the ti in 
but — an allied, but different, form. The name of the letter itself is yoo, 

§ 208. The Slender Vowel, ^c— So much for the changes of the vowel, 
or diphthong. In many, perhaps in most, cases the series of further 
changet begins in a di^thong ; or can, at least, be traced to one. Let us 
suppose that between a consonant and a broad vowel a slender one inter- 
venes, and that instead of sa, so, or su, the word is sea, sea, orseu {or sea, sia, 
Ml). Or let it be y alone ; giving sya, sya, m. Or let it be the vowel 
alone whieh changes into y— the semivowel. The details ate of imnnt 


importance. The general character of the change is all that is here in- 
dicated. It is a matter of general experience that such combinations as 
gya^ &c., are Unstable. Their notorions tendency is to nm into the 
sound of sh ; in which case the semivowel disappears, and the conso- 
nant changes its character. Words, in onr own language, like tugar 
and sura {shuggar and ahure) teach us this. 

^ I 209. But what is the tendency when the consonant is <-? Words 
like nature, picture, and others inform us. Here the sound of u has 
become that of yoo, and a semivowel stands between the vowel and the 
consonant that precedes it. We pronounce them natshur and pietahur 
(sometimes pikehur). In other words, the influence of the diphthonga- 
lised vowel has been the same in kind as that which changed Ha into 
sha. The vowel element disappears. The consonant changes. But the 
change is a different one. S was a Sibilant (a simple one) already ; and 
it changes into another simple one— one closely allied to it, or, rather, 
a mere variety of itself. T was no Sibilant at all, but a DentaL Yet 
it becomes a Sibilant Not, however, a simple but a compound one. 
In other words, the combination tya is, like sga, Unstable, and has a 
tendency towards Assibilation. We can understand this by pronouncing 
the word rapidly, and seeing how naturally the sound of 8h introduces 

Mutatis mutandis, the same occurs with dg, di, or de, followed by a 
vowel. It becomes deh, orj — i.e. Compound Sibilant, which is to ^A as 
zh is to sh, and d to t — ordure, verdure ; and, more exceptionally, dew 
pronounced as jew, and duke as juke {dehew and dehook). 

Thirdly, — ^what is the tendency when k precedes a vowel, semivowel, 
or diphthong of the kind under notice? The comparison of words like 
Chester and Castra suggests a similar process. The Latin word oasira 
in Anglosaxon is ceaster. 

But this gives the sound of ksh; and no such Compound Sibilant 
exists in English. We may, however, suppose that, at some time or 
other in the history of the word ceaster, it existed ; but, as it was Un- 
stable, it was not long before the k became t. Nor is there anything 
gratuitous in this assumption. 

Farther than this we cannot see very clearly ; i.e. we cannot see why 
words spelt with a c are sounded as if they were spelt with s when fol- 
lowed by a small vowel ; for all that has just been said touches only the 
change from s to sh, and from t and k to tsh. The simple s, with no 
second element to affect it, is in a different predicament. Can we say 
that small vowels, as such, exert an influence on a Palatal when it pre- 
cedes them akin to that of the more complex combinations which have 
just been noticed ? We can — we can say so ; and, when we say any- 
thing at all, do say so, and must say so. But it is saying very little. 
Porms like sga and tya we can tost. We can pronounce them, and see 


that, 88 a matter of fact, the changes just indicated take place. Words 
like «a and m, ka and ko^ show no such tendencies. 

But that the syllable ka may change into te (sound for sound) we 
see in forms like Bicester, Cirencester^ &Cm which are as true deriva- 
tires from castra as -caster and -Chester, The change, however, from k 
to 8 is &r more obscure than that from s to «A, or from k to tsh^ though ^f 
the magnitude and extent of it there is no doubt. The Latin is the 
language in which the question is best investigated ; for, in the Latin, 
by comparing it with the Greek, we can see when k was certainly in- 
Tested with its own proper sound, and. in the Italian, see how it has 
undergone the same processes, resulting in the same Compound Sibilant 
tffA as it has in English and other tongues. 

Lastly. — The presumptions are that when g is to Ar as ^ to (f, &c., 
and £f to ff tJi d to tf and eh to e as sh is to «, the histor}' of the two 
Palatals will run parallel. They do this, and they do not. 

So £Eir as the Compound Sibilant goes they agree, and ^e and ffi come 
oot as dehe and dzhi (J), where te and ti, or ty, become tsh (ch). Yet they 
do not present themselves as ee and rt, but (on the contrary) as je and 
^t, whereas A; in a similar situation is sounded as -s. This is because 
the words by which the Surd Palatal (^) is represented, are, as a class, 
exotics — of French or Latin rather than of English origin ; and the 
English deh (j) is the French eh (also spelt j) strengthened. But in 
other languages the parallel is incomplete; ^, when changed, being 
changed into y rather than assibilated. And this is the rule for the 
German languages in general ; and, in the English itself, where in Eng- 
lish words, when^ is changed at all, it is the sound of y which it assumes. 

But ga and ka start even, so to say, on the same career of Instability. 
There are many who talk of kyards (cards) and of their kyind (kind) 
friends. And as many call a garden a gyarden^ and a girl a gytrl. Still, 
the histories of g and k diverge. Two cases may help to determine the 
difference. Z* is a rarer sound in languages than -s; and y is a sound 
with which g is pre-eminently interchangeable ; though g becomes y 
oftener than y becomes g. Be this as it may, the Assibilation of the Pala- 
tals — k and g — is a fact of great generality in language ; and almost, if 
not equally, general is the divergence between the two during the history 
of the long and complex series of changes which both undergo. Of its 
special importance in English there is no doubt The very complications 
it has introduced in our spelling are sufficient evidence of this. 

* Z in English is common sound ; but not as a part of the original 
word : for no English word begins with it. Where it occurs is in the 
Plural of Substantives, and the Third Person of Verbs, where the last 
Consonant is a Sonant ; as stags^ moves, drags, &c., &c. But here it is 
only a modified s — an -« modified by having accommodated itself to 
the prooeding tound. 


258 ACCENT. 



§ 210. Accent plays a great part in all languages ; 
and no inconsiderable one in the English. 

It may fall on the last syllable of a word ; as in 
brigade, pret&ace, superadd, cavalier. Most of these 
words are of foreign origin. 

It may fall on the last but one ; as in anchor, 
hasten, father, fdoces, bespatter, terrific. 

Also on the last but two, or the third from the end 
of the word ; as in regular, f&rtify, different, arthd- 

Sometimes it falls on the last syllable but three ; 
as in ahsohitdy, lurrvmary, inevitable, 6rthodoQcy. 

This is, perhaps, as far as it is ever carried bach- 
wards ; for in treating of Accent we count from the 
end, rather than the beginning, and talk of penultir 
mate and antepenultimate, rather than of first or 
second syllables. 

§ 211. Place of the Accent in English. — The 
syllable on which we expect to find an accent is, of 
course, the most important. But the test of importance 
is neither evident nor very regular. The second -o- in 
orthography is accented ; but it is diflBcult to say in 
what respect it is the most important, leading, promi- 
nent, or characteristic syllable. In Composition it is 
the first of the elements of the compoimd wlych 
carries the accent : but of this more will be said in the 

For the present it is safe to say that, in words of 
English origin, the la^t syllable is, as a rule, wnr 
accented; the exceptions being compounds like TnistahB, 
be/orey and others where the prefix is a word, or part 

ACCENT. 259 

of one, which has no accent of its own. More, how- 
ever, will be said on this point in the chapter on 

§ 212. The exceptional character of final syllables 
with an accent is a part and parcel of the structure of 
the English language. 

In the first instance it abounds with monosyllables : 
and in the second it forms its Derivatives by a/fixes 
rather than by pre&xes : having dozens of words, 
whether compound or derivative, like TiSedfid, singing, 
spdheUy mdnlyy &c., for one like amisa or mistake. 
All this tends to throw the accent backwards. 

§ 213. With the French — and the French element 
in English is important — the case is different. The 
French is a language of Latin origin, but from a great 
number of Latin words it has dropped the last syllable. 
Hence, words which in Latin ended in -w, -i, -em, &c., 
as signs of the Genitive, Dative, and Accusative Cases, 
in words like ndtio^ rdtio^ &c., and ran nation^is^ 
naJti&nri^ Ac, when divested, as they are in French, of 
their inflection, have their accent, which was originally 
on the penultimate syllable, on the last. 

§ 214. Every superadded syllable, when it is final, 
has a tendency to throw the accent back ; e.g. m/inly, 
manliness ; sickness^ sicknesses. To adjectives in -ic 
(and indeed to other words) three additions may be made 
— c&mic^ cdmical^ c&mically ; and when we get to such 
a word as comicality^ the accent, which we can no 
longer throw back, has to be put forward. 

§ 215. Distinctive Accent, — In each part of the 
following sentences the same word occurs twice, but 
with a difference. In the first use of the word the 
accent is on the first syllable, in the second on the last, 
the words with the first syllable accented being Nouns ; 
those with the second so affected being Verbs. 


260 ACCENT. 

!• The Exports and vm/porta are considerable. 2. 
They import cloth and en^pdrt corn. 

1. Honey is an Extract from flowers. 2. You cannot 
extract honey from all flowers. 

1. I hsLvefr^uent opportunities of seeing him. 2. 
IfreqvAnt the theatre. 

1. This is the dbject. 2. I objSct to this. 

1. PSrfumes are agreeable. 2. The flowers per- 
fume the air. 

These Accents may be called distinctive. 





§ 216. Etymoloffy and Syntax. — Compoaition and 
Derivaiion. — Etymology and Syntax are the two prin- 
cipal parts of Grammar. 

Etymology deals with single words, and the various 
forms they may take ; Syntax with two words, or more, 
in Combination. 

Combinations, by which two words are combined into 
one, give Compov/rids. Such a compoimd is father-- 
like. It can be divided into two separate independent 
words. The result, however, is a single one. 

With fathers and likeness^ and a whole host of 
words beside, this is not the case. Subtract the '^eas 
from likeness and no separate independent word re- 
mains ; and in the -8 in fathers there is not even an 
approach to a second word at all. The nimierous cl&ss 
of words which likeness and fathers represent is that 
of Derivatives. 

§ 217. Com/position. — Derivation. — Inflection. — 
Declension. — ConjugaMon. — Composition takes place 
when two separate words are joined together so as to 
form a single word, as— 

daj-light dog-8tar Engliihrnan 

nut-brown &Uier-like peacock. 


§ 218. Derivation takes place when a word is 
either changed by the addition of some new elemen- 
tary sound, or by the alteration of one previously 

hvait'er drunk-ard be-spclke 

wood-en spin-^^ chick-en. 

Composition implies the addition of whole words; 
Derivation, the addition of parts of words. 

Certain Derivatives are called Inflections* These 
present themselves in nouns and verbs only. They are 
the forms by which we determine Gender, Number, 
Case, Voice, Mood, Tense, and Person, and will be con- 
sidered in detail in the sequel. 

The Inflection of a noun is called its Declension. 
Nouns are declined. 

The Inflection of a verb is called its Conjugation, 
Verbs are conjugated. 

The two classes, however, are not always so easily 
separated as the preceding examples may lead us to sup- 
pose. Indeed, the doctrine that many Derivational ele- 
ments were once separate words, but that through wear 
and tear, through time and use, they have lost their 
independent character, either by having become obso- 
lete, or by loss of their more characteristic parts, is 
both probable in itself and well supported by facts. 
Whether it will account for all Derivational changes is 
another question. It applies to syllables of appreciable 
length more readily than to single letters like the -« in 
fathers^ or the -i in patri : and it applies to single 
letters better than to internal changes like spoke from 
speak. Nevertheless, whatever may be the extent to 
which the doctrine may be driven, the difference be- 
tween a Derivative form like fathers and a Compound 
like fatherlike is manifest. Whether fathers was ever 


aR divisible into two separate words, as faiherWce, may 
be doubtful ; but there is no doubt as to what it is at 
present. It is a si/ngle word modified ; and not a pair 
of words joined together as one. And this is sufficient 
for the present enquiry. 

§ 219. CoTTvpownda that may be mistaJcen for 
Deinvativea. — Composition simulates Derivation, when, 
after the imion of two distinctly separate words, one of 
them either changes its form or becomes obsolete. 
Thus m^nly looks more like a derivative than a com- 
pound. But it is only a shortened form of manlike. 
Again, the ric in biahop^ric is no longer current as an 
ordinary term in English. Yet, when it was first at- 
tached to the word bishop^ it was as truly a separate 
word as kingdom^ domain^ or jurisdiction^ or any 
other substantive. 

WTien we look to the instances just given, the pro- 
cess of reducing derivation to composition is an easy 
matter. All that is required is a certain amoimt of 
knowledge of the language in its earlier stages. This 
is wanted for bishopric. But in the word manly less 
than this will be enough. We have only to consider a 
little, and its connection vdth manlike strikes us at 
once. The words gentlemanly and gentlemanlike are 
still more to the purpose. With a little knowledge 
and a little consideration we can do much — so long as 
the word is a dissyllable ; for we can separate its com- 
ponent part«, even if we do no more. 

So long, then, as a compound has two syllables, 
out of the second of which we can get a second word, 
combinations that, in the first instance, look like Deri- 
vatives, may, under many circumstances, be put in their 
proper place. 

But Jlfonosyllables may also, in respect to their 
origin, be Compound ; and, when this is the case, the 


analysis is more perplexing. Words like Tiot^ such, and 
which are not easily picked to pieces. Yet, common 
words as they are, and monosyllables as they are, 
they are compounds. Not is a compound of the 
negative element ti', and whit (as in not a whit). 
It is 7i' aught, which is again compounded of a prefix 
-i- or ye. Which is, in Scotch, whUk; in German, 
wdch ; and such is, in Scotch, swiUc; in which the 4- 
represents the -^ in like ; which, as we have seen, has 
been already reduced to -ly ; and which thus early has 
lost its character as an independent and entire word. 

Manifest, unequivocal, and self-evident Compoimds 
belong to Syntax ; manifest Derivatives to Etymology. 

That some, perhaps the most important portion of 
them, is separated from the rest, imder the name of 
Inflection, has already been stated. For the remainder 
there is no definite name — which is inconvenient. The 
Derivatives of the more indefinite divisions will be con- 
sidered first : but not exhaustively. Those only which 
form clear and important subdivisions will be noticed. 
Nor will any great sacrifice be made to systematic ar- 
rangement. On the contrary, some of these, in compli- 
ance with the ordinary form of our grammars, will be 
taken along with the inflections, and considered as they 
refer to the different 'Parts of Speech;^ i.e. under 
the heads of Noun, Pronoun, or Verb, as the case may 
be. What the names of these parts of speech mean is 
assumed to be known ; and such refinements upon the 
definitions of them as are held to be necessary, will 
be found under ' Syn^ooj.' For 'Etymology^ they can 
be taken as we find them in the ordinary grammars. 

§ 220. The division of Derivatives with which it 
is best to begin is that in which a word belonging 
to one part of speech, .by a change of form (gene- 
rally, though not always, an addition of some kind) 


becomes connected with another; i.e. becomes an 
Adverb or a Substantive instead of an Adjective, or a 
Verb instead of a Noun, 

Instances of the first kind are wisely^ bravely, 
slowly, from wise, brave, and alow. 

This, historically, is a case of Composition ; but, 
practically, it is one of Derivation. 

Instances of the second kind are wooden, truthful, 
sheepish, &c. 

Instances of the third kind are to grease, to use, 
and some others ; where the sense is that of a Verb, and 
the s is sounded 2& z. In grease and use, the Substan- 
tives, it is sounded as it is spelt, or rather as if it were 
spelt greace, uce. Here the change from Surd to the 
Sonant changes the word from a Substantive to a Verb. 
In raise firom rise, SLudfeU from, fall, &c.,the Vowel is 

This is an instance where the transforming element 
consists of an internal change rather than of an addi- 
tion aliv/nde. 

A still better example of this internal change is 
foimd in words like survey, iocport, &c., which are Sub- 
stantives, as compared with survSy and exp&rt, which 
are Verbs. Here, nothing is changed but the accent. 

But these are only selected instances from many of 
the same kind. 

§ 221. Hybridism. — In lambkin and lancet y the final sjUableR (-kin 
and -et) have much the same power. They both express the idea of 
sraallness or diminatiyeness. These words are but two out of a multi- 
tude, the one (lamb) bebf^ of English, the other (lance) of Norman 
origin. The same is the case with the superadded syllables : -kin being 
English, -et Norman. Now, to add an English termination to n Nor- 
man word, or vice vend, is to corrupt the language ; as may be seen by 
saying either lance-kin^ or lamb-et. 

Such words are hybrid: which means mongrel. 

Words like peneira-ble and penstra-bility are not only possible, but 
actual Latin words; Tic, penetr<dfUii, penetrabilitat, So are posnble 


and possibility. So are legible and legibility. But readable and bear- 
able, with their opposites, un-readable and un-bearablej are hybrid, and 
(to say the least) exceptionable. 

The terminations -ize, -ist, and -ism are Greek, and in words like 
ostracize and ostracism thej find a fit and proper place. In words of 
English origin they are exceptionable. 

Individually (to repeat what has been already stated), I consider 
that hybridism is a malum per se. It is often difficult, howerer, to 
avoid it. Many scientific terms err in this respect ; sometimes exhi- 
biting the heterogeneous juxta-position of more than one language. 
Nor is this, in all cases, an accident. Occasionally it occurs through 
inadvertency : yet, occasionally, it is defended. In a few cases it is the 
lesser of two evils. It is least blameworthy in words like the ones jnrt 
quoted— words ending in -ize. It would be difficult to dispense with 
such words as moralize, civilize, and some others : however much the 
former part may be Latin, and however mudi the latter part may be 
Greek. Again — to words like botanic, where the -ic (like the botan-) is 
Greek, we may add the Latin -al. As such a word was possible in the 
Lower Empire, where such words as irpuroyordpios were common, we 
may call these (after the fashion of the architects) Byzantine forma- 
tions. But this is only naming our tools. 

§ 222. Roots and Themes {Crude Forms). — If .we take a ward like 
father, and by adding -«, make it either a Genitive (Possessive) Case Sin- 
gular, or a Nominative, or Genitive Plural, the sound of -«, which we 
add to it, is an Inflection. In this (^2aq father is what is sometimes called 
a thcTne (or basis), sometimes a crude form. It is the st^m on which we 
engraft the Inflections. So far as we know, it is the original form ; from 
which fathers' is a Derivative, and fatherlike, or fatherly, a Compound. 
But this alone will not make it so. When we compare it with mo-ther 
and hvo-iher (and we may add sis-^), the second syllable looks so like 
a Derivational element, that the notion that the true fundamental, basic, 
primitive (or whatever we may call it), word xsfath, or fat, suggests itself. 
If it be, it is a Root ; the root being that which remains when every super- 
added element has been taken away. Roots, however, go back to a period 
of language which belongs to General, or Comparative, rather than to 
special Philology. VocU- is the theme of the Latin Frequentative Verb, 
vocit-o, vocit-as, vocit-avi, &c. ; but, as voc-, the theme of «oc-o, voe-<u, 
voc-aui, exists also, we know that -it- is no part of the Root, 




§ 223. The first division of the derivational pro- 
cesses contains those by which a word is changed as a 
Part of Speech, and the form with which it is conve- 
nient to begin is the aflBx -ly. Whatever it may have 
been at one time, it is not now a separate word. So 
we take it as we find it, and treat it as derivational. 

In manly it has undergone one change ; and in the 
Scotch whilk and svdlk, and the German solch, and 
welchy another ; while in the English which and such 
(the Frisian 8ok) it has left its mark only so far as it 
has changed the form of the word in which we know 
that it once presented itself. 

In the first instance, it gives ns Adjectives like 
rnaTiJyssmanldke ; and here it keeps its original im- 
port. A manly person is a person like a man. 

But in words like wisely^ bravely^ hotly, &c., where 
it is added to an Adjective, it is the sign of an Ad- 

§ 224. The Afiocea "ness and -th. — These convert 
Adjectives into Substantives ; for (to begin with the 
first) by the addition of "nesa every Adjective becomes 
a Substantive ; the result being an Abstract name for 
the attribute implied, or suggested, by the Adjective 
itself. Redrfieaa, weak-^ness, &c., are the attributes 
implied or suggested by red and weak, &c. This is 
only another way of saying that for every adjective 



there is a corresponding Substantive, either actual or 
possible ; and such is the case. Practically, however, 
there is a limit to their formation. When the Adjective, 
either by Composition or Derivation, exceeds two syl- 
lables, an additional one becomes cimibersome* Never- 
theless trisyllabic Abstracts are common, and quadri- 
syllables not imcommon. Even such a word as pv^aiU 
lanimousnesa must be tolerated if necessary. From 
the mixed character, however, of the English vocabulary 
there is no want of substitutes ; for the Latin termina- 
tions "ty and -biUty, as in piety and penetrability^ 
along with the French -men^, as in conteTvtTnenfvty give 
us, if not actual, approximate equivalents. 

But these are not all. Besides these there are the 
forms in -th. As -^^ is a single consonant, it creates no 
new syllable ; but attaches itself directly to the main 
word. Doing so, it generally creates some slight eupho- 
nic modifications. Thus — in strong^ long, and broody 
the vowel changes, giving strength^ lengthy breadth 
(bredth). In height the th is often sounded as U In 
depth the p has a tendency to become /• Compare 
TV(f>deh for rvirdeis. 

The Abstract names thus formed are limited in 
number, and constitute a peculiar class. When we talk 
of the longneas or shortness of anything, we imply 
that the object to which the terms apply is either long 
or short. But with forms in "th we may talk of the 
length of a very short walk^ the height of a very low 
wall, or the dqpth of a very shallow streams in which 
cases we merely mean that the waUc, the waUy and the 
water have a certain amount of extension in a certain 
direction. Whether it be much or little is another mat- 
ter. We mention it generally, and the conception we 
connect with our abstraction is not so much that of any 
particular kind of dimension, but of the dimension 


itself. If we suggest that the quality under notice is 
either below or above this indefinite kind of average, we 
have recoiurse to the affix -Tiess, and say shoriyaeaa, low- 
neaa, and shaUovHoeaa in the one case, long^neaa, high- 
71688, or deqHne88 in the other. 

§ 225. The Affijxe8 -er and -mg. — ^Every verb can 
be converted into a Substantive by the addition of 
either -er or -A/ng ; the result being, in the first 
case, a name for the agent, in the second a name 
for the action implied in, or suggested by, the Verb. 
Hunlr-er, the name of any one who hunt8 ; hunt-ing, 
the simple act of any one that hunts. This is only 
another way of saying that every Verbal Substantive 
(for that is what these forms in -er and ^ing are called) 
has its corresponding Verb ; and every Verb its two 
corresponding Verbals. This is a repetition of what 
has been said about the Affix -nees ; and it is made in 
order to say how absolute and extensive the three forms 
are, and how they multiply the possible words in our 
English ; since, possibly and potentially, they double 
the number of our Adjectives, and treble that of our 

The older form of -inff was -utiff. Out of the Objective Case of 
this form in -ttfi^ or -tny come the Adverbs in -tii^r — as darkling ^ &c. 
More on this point will be found as we proceed. 

§ 226. Affixes in -en. — These are numerous. Two 
only belong to the present division — 

(a) The -en in whit-en, soft-en, &c., where the 
main word is an Adjective ; and the meaning is ' ToaJce 
white ; ' and that in length-en, strength-en, &c., where 
the main word is an Abstract Substantive, and the 
meaning is ^i/wvest with the character of length, or 
strength^ — 

(6) The -en in woodren. — This shows that the Sub- 
stantiYeB to which the termination applies are the n&3a\«^ 


of the material of which something is made — gdden ^ 
made of gold, 

§ 227. Change of Consonant between Noun and 
Verb. — In breadth and breathe^ doth and doihe^ the 
Surd changes to the Sonant, and the Noun becomes a 
Verb. Use and grease are of foreign origin. The 
sound of the Verb, in all three cases, is breadhe^ dddJie, 
uze, greaze. 



§ 228. The second division of the derivational pro- 
cesses contains those by which two words belonging to 
the same group as Parts of Speech are changed from 
one section of it to another. 

§ 229. The Affixes -fern, -ocfc, -mgr, -Ivag^ &c — 
Diminutives. — The Diminutives are a convenient class 
to begin with. 

Compared with lamb, man, and hill^ the words 
lambkin, manilmi, and hillock, convey tlie idea of 
smallness or diminution. In hillock there is the simple 
expression of comparative smallness in size. In doggie 
and lassie the addition of the -ie makes tlie word not 
so much a Diminutive as a term of tenderness. The 
idea of smallness, accompanied, perhaps, with that of 


neatness, generally carries with it that of approbation. 
Clean in English, means, in German, little^Jdeine. 
The feeling of protection, which is extended to small 
objects, engenders the notion of endearment.* Some- 
times, a Diminutive is a term of disparagement ; as 
lordling and hireling. 

Next to knowing that in some Diminutive Nouns 
there is something more, it is useftil to know that in 
others there is something leaSy than the simple notion of 
smallness. This means that, in many cases, the Dimi- 
nutive displaces the original word, and takes its power ; 
but without being accompanied by the idea of diminu- 
tion. Thus sol, in Latin =8i6n. But the Slavonic for 
sun is 8lunce= little sun, originally ; now simply sun. 
The only word for star in Latin is stella = ster-ida = 
little star. The French for sun is sol-eil = 8ol-illu8 = 
little sun. In Italian frat-ello and sor-ella = brother 
and sister = f rater, soror, without any idea of size. 
In the Lithuanic, where the Diminutives attain their 
maxi/m,u7a, we may meet such expressions as the big 
little sun. 

§ 230. The Augmentatives. — The opposite to 
Diminutive is Augmentative, from the Latin atig- 
mentum= increase ; Augmentatives being words by 
which the notion of excessive size is suggested. They 
are, by no means, so widely diffused over the domain of 
language as Diminutives ; and where they occur, they 
are less numerous. The Italian is, probably, the lan- 
guage which has the most of them. In the Italian, 
however, the Diminutives (as has already been stated) 
are numerous also : so that there is no reason for be- 
lieving that the two classes are in any inverse ratio to 
each other. Like the Diminutives, the Augmentatives 

* As klein U to dean in Qennan and English, so is petUut {tougki, 
to f€iU (tmait) in Latin and French. 


have secondary meanings ; and, as a general rule, the 
idea conveyed by them is anything but complimentary* 
Many of them are terms of disparagement, though some 
are quite indiflferent. 

§ 231. Patronymics. — In Anglosaxon the termina- 
tion -^mg was as patronymic as -1S17J is in Greek, In the 
Bible-translation the son of Elisha is called ^^m^. In 
the Anglosaxon Chronicle occur such genealogies as the 
following: — Ida wees Eoppvng, Eoppa Esing^ ma 
Ingvngy Inga Angenwiti/ng, Angen/mt Alocmg, Aloe 
Beonodngy Beonoc Branding, Brand Boeldoegimgy 
Bceldag Wddenvng, Wdden Fri^owuljing, Fri^^&evruXf 
Finning y Fvan Oodwuljing, God/wulf Oeating^ldsL 
was the son of Eoppa, Eoppa of Esa, Esa of Inga, Inga 
of Angenwit, Angenwit of Aloe, Aloe of Beonoc, Beonoc 
of Brand, Brand of Baeldag, Bseeldag of Woden, Woden 
of Fri^owulf, Fri-Bowidf of Finn, Finn of Godwulf, 
Godwulf of Geat. — In Greek this would be "ISa ffp 
^^OTnreiSrj?^ "EoTTTra 'Hcre^Siy^, "Hera ^lyy siSrjs, ^\yya 'A7- 
y6v<f>LTelS7j9, &c. In like manner, Edgar Athdvng means 
Edgar of the family of the nobles, 

§ 232. Details. — Diminutives are conmioner in 
Scotch than in English. 

Forms in -ock. — Hillock in English ; lassock^ lad" 
dock, wifock, and others in Scotch. In laddAck^ las- 
sick, in the same language, the -o- is changed into -i-. 
In emmet = little ant, the k has become -f. So it has 
in ^0666^= piece, mouthful; which is in Sco^h gap' 
pock ; mammet from mamviock ; gimlet from gemlick, 
from gaff et= fork. Key, from whom these and other 
details are taken, adds cricket, hornet, limpet^ locket, 
mallet, packet, pocket, sippit, smicket (from smock), 
tippet, wevet (Somersetshire for spider's web), baUot, 
spigot. Here, however, the origin of the -t is uncer- 
tain. The local term fitchet = polecat has a better 


elaixn, inasmuch as there is another form fitchew^ in 
which the origin of the w out of a A; is nearly certain. 
Brisket and maggot are transpositions from briateck 
(from brecut), and the A. S. ma^v, where Sik or g pre- 
cedes (as in amock). 

Form va -vng. — lord^ng^ bird-ing. 

Form m -L — nozzle (nosey, specHe {speck), spittle 
{spit)y throstle {thrush), thimble (thumb), girdle, grid" 
die {gridiron), kernel (com), gristle, knuckle, stubble, 

Kande^smaU comer, from cant^comer. 

Hurdle ; in Dutch horde ; Grerman hurde. Hoard- 
ing, without the 4, is used in an allied sense by builders 
in England. 

Form in -is. — Scotch — vrijiej daddie, lassie, lambie, 
boaUe. English — daddy, baby. 

Double Derivaiives. — Forms of which the basis is A;— 

K-j-ie. — Scotch — Lassockie, lassickiey vd/ockie. 

K-j-vn. — This gives us the termination -fciTi, the 
commonest of our Diminutives, though by no means 
general. The following list is from a paper on English 
Diminutives in the Philological Museum (vol. i. pp. 
679-686). Manikin, lambkin, pipkin ( = little pipe). 
Oerk4/n is from the root of gourd rather than from 
flrowrdJ itself ; Germaji, gurke ; Norse, gurka. 

Jerkm » frock. In Dutch, jurk. 

Pumpkin. — Dutch, pomp. Obsolete in English. 

GrisImi^IAttle pig. Gris or grice. Obsolete. 

Bumpkm. — Root 6-m; DntcYi, boom^tree, beam ; 
in Oerman baum=tree ; in English beam (generally = 
the Latin trabs, but preserved in hom-^^m, with the 
power of arbor). The notion of woodiness, connected 
with stupidity, or extreme simplicity, is shown in the 
word blockhead. 

Firkm = LiUle fourth = Latin quadrantulvs. 



Lastly, we have in ftx(Z-i-A>m, TruLTi^h-n/ny the 
combination -i + k+n. 

The form with -l+ing. — BanUl-mgj dai'^-vngj 
chitter-lr^/ag, d/vxhl-m^^jirat-l-irig^foTid^'^^ 
Ui/ng^ kit-lr4/ng, neaUl-vng^ star-lrvag [8tare\ aap'l'Vng, 
aeedr-l^Qy 8trip-l4/ng, atuck-l-mg, wHM/ag^ year-L-vngy 
and a few others. In change-l^i/ng and nura&^-vng, 
the root is other than English. In hire4-im{^, lardn 
Umg^ and wit-Iring the idea of Diminution is accom- 
panied by that of contempt. 

The form in l-\-ock. — In Professor Key's list I find, 
from JamiesoD, and (as such) Scotch — humjhl-ock^a 
small heap, knub-l^ck^a little knob. 

Tlie comlmiation let=:l+et. — Here the Affix -f- is 
Crerman — common in the Swiss and Bavarian forms 
of speech — whilst the -t- is either English or French, 
as the case may be. When English, it is "t in emviet ; 
i.e. a t=k; when French, the -t in lancet. When the 
latter, it gives us an instance of hybridism. In gi/mAet 
the affix seems to be English. In ham-letj 8tream4etj 
and ringlety it is, probably, French. 

§ 233. Form in -^rt. — ^These are not so much 
simple Augmentatives as words conveying the sense of 
disparagement— driMifcard, stinkard^ laggardj coward, 

§ 234. Except in the proper name Edgar Atheli^ 
= Edgar of the noble blood, the termination --mg as a 
Patronymic is rare. As a termination, however, of a 
long series of the names of towns and villages in Eng- 
land it has commanded attention as an instrument of 
historical and ethnological criticism. In — 

Barlings in Lincolnshire. I Hastings in Sussex. 
BeaUngs ^ Soflfolk. | LiUings — Yorkshire. 

of which the full forms, as foimd in the Anglosaxoa 



Charters, are in -o^, it is held by Eemble and others 
that we have the names of the men and women who 
occupied certain districts rather than the names of the 
districts themselves. 

Hunts ..... 3 
Northumberlund ... 3 

Notte 3 

Cambridge . / . • ,2 

Derby 2 

Dorset 2 

Gloucester .... 2 

Oxon . 

Bucks . 

Devon , 

Salop . 




Wilts . 

Word for word Wales is Wealhaa^ strangers j for- 
eignersj aliens ; but it is only one word out of many ; 
the transfer of the name of the inhabitants to the land 
inhabited being common both in A. S. and Old English. 

In Cornwall^ the V w-l is singular ; as it also is in 
the following passage : — 

pis tiMng com him how Wale him betrayed 
perfoT IB Gascoyn left and cr at werre delayed. 

Hob, Br. 263. 

The older name for England is Engle = Angles^ 
rather than Anglia. 

The Denes addc the maj-stre, tho al was }*do : 

And by Est Angle and Lyndeseye hii wende Tor> atte laste, 

And so hamwazd al by Kent and slow and bamde vaste. 

Hob, Glou, 160. 

Kent . 

. 26 


. 24 

Sussex . • 

. 24 

Essex . 

. 21 

Suffolk . 

. 15 

York . 

. 13 


. 7 



Berks . 

. 5 

Surrey . 


Beds . 


Norths . 


Lancashire . 


Middlesex . 


HertB . 

, 3 

Again, in Lithuanic — 

Szvedai, Swedes from Szvedas, a Swede 
Pr&sai, PrusHane — PrCisas, a Prussian 
JAuktd, FioUs L^nkas, a Pole 


« Poland. 

276 THE AFnX -JETS. 

§ 235. The Affix -er, va underj vnaevj &c. — ^The 
Affix -er attached to an Adjective is the well-known 
sign of the Comparative D^ree. But it is found in 
words which are neither Adjectival nor Comparative, 
such as (1) whether^ (hth-er; (2) certain prepositions 
and adverbs, as ov-er, und-er, af-t-er; (3) Adjectives 
of the Comparative Degree, as vns-erj strong-erj bett-er, 
&c. ; (4) Adjectives, with the form of the Compara- 
tive, but the power of the Positive Degree, as upp^eVj 
und-er, inn-er^ ouUer^ hindner. 

What is the idea common to all these words? 
Bopp, who has best generalized the view of the form, 
considers the fundamental idea to be that of duality. 
In the Comparative Degree we have a relation between 
one object and some other object like it, or a relation 
between two single elements of comparison: as ii i^ 
iviser than B. In the Superlative Degree we have a 
relation between one object and all others like it, or 
a relation between one single and one complex ele- 
ment of comparison : A is wiser than J5, (7, D, &c 
Over and above, however, the idea of simple compari- 
son, there is that of (1) contrariety; as in mner, ouier^ 
under ^ upper ^ over ; and (2) choice in the way of an 
alternative; as either^ n£ither, other, and whether, a 
word which, as a pronoun, is nearly obsolete. No one 
at present says ivhether of the two will you have ? or . 
whether of the two is this ? but, on the contrary, which 
of the two, &c. In Lithuanic, the converse takes place, 
and whether (at least its equivalent hxtras) applies \^ 
more* than two, e.g: — 

Try 8 bernyczei Bzeno pi ore ; 
Kalras b&sit mano melns ? 
Katras plauksit yainikelio ? 

t>. Thru young men mow hay ; 

Whether (which) will be my Ioto ? 
Whether (which) will swim for the wreath ? 


The word whether, as is suggested by this quotation, 
is an old one; being the Latin uter (o-uter, whence 
7iretjUer=s7ir-either) and the Greek tcorepof (^iroreposi). 

That the -er in all these applications is invested, in 
its general sense, with the notion of Duality, is simply 
a matter of fact. Its exact import, however, in the 
Comparative Degree, is not so simple as it seems to be. 
This is because the oldest form, in the German lan- 
guages, of the affix was not -er, but -dz. 

§ 236. The Affixes -ma and -st. — The -ma here 
indicated is, in the present language, disguised ; because 
it looks as if words like wpmost were simply com- 
pounds formed by the addition of -moat. 

On the contrary, they are (some of them at least) 
remarkable instances of an accumulation of derivor- 
tumal elements taking the guise of a full and complete 
word ; and, as such, passing for ordinary instances of 

The Anglosaxon langiiage presents us with the fol- 
lowing forms ; which show that the m has nothing to 
do with the word moat. 



innema (inn-ema) 


iitema (iit-ema) 


si'Sema (m'^-^nia) 


IsBtema (Iset-ema) 


ni'Sema (ni'5-ma) 


forma (for-ma) 


seftema (aft-ema) 


yfema (nf-ema) 


hindema (hind-ema) 


medema (mid-ema) 


From the words in question there was formed, in 
Anglosaxon, a regular superlative in the usual manner ; 
viz., by the addition of st; as cefte-Wrest, fyr-mrest, 
Icete-Wr^tj sm-m-esty yf^^m^eatj ute-mr-est^ ininc-Wr-eBt. 


Hence the m is the m in the words vn/nema^ &c.j 
whilst the -st is the sign of the superlative. Hence, we 
should write — 






fore- most 













In nethr^^'Tnost, &c., there is a superlative super- 
added to a comparative. 

§ 237. The Affix th, and the Befiected Ord%nal,--Th\s is the affix 
by which aU the ordinals from three to twelve^ inclusiye, are distin- 
guished from their Cardinals. The Ordinals of one and two are formed 
on a different principle. 

It is not without a reason that the formative of the Ordinals is 
noticed next in order to those of the Degrees of Comparison. Either 
rightly or wrongly the ideas of Ordinality and Supcrlativity haTe been 
held by so influential an authority as Bopp to bo allied. The train of 
reasoning, which is not given in the words of the author, but which, I 
hope, does ftJl justice to his argument, is as follows : — 

The older form for first was forma ; evidently one of the Superla- 
tives in -m. This m is not only the -m- of the lithuanic permat and 
the Latin primitSt but of intimus, extimw^ and other similar words in 
Latin. In the Greek vpSnos this m is replaced by -t ; and in the -ttm" 
of Septimus and cxtimus we have both sounds. Hence, form for form» 
the Latin decimus is the -<tm- of sep-tim-us — the t^ while the t in 
TpSrros and in sexttts is the same minus the -m. In ociavus this ^n- 
is represented, as it is also in nommus; of which nonus is a contrac- 

The -m- that in octavu^ and nommus is reasonably held to have 
passed into a -v-, is, with equal reason, held to have become an -n ; espe- 
cially the -w in nine and ten. But these, like the m in novem and dfcem^ 
to which they answer, are not Ordinals, but Cardinals ; though in the 
Greek fi'vca and S^ico, iwatos and HmroSf there is neither m nor n. 
But, with €^^ofio5, as compared with srpiimus^ the Greek shows that it 
does not wliolly ignore the m (fx). That there is much curious detail in 
all this, and much to think about, is certain ; the result being that what 
we may call a Eeflection of the Ordinal formatives upon the Cardinals 
must be recognised as an instrument of criticism ; so that the Latin 
decern differs from the Greek 8^/ca because it has had the -m of the 
Ordinal thrown back upon, and incorporated with, it; and the English 
ten differs from the Latin decern because the radical k has been first 
softened into h and then ejected, and because, moreover, the -s» hai 

roRUs IN "IN. 279 

become -n. In all this there is nothing open to oljection ; and what 
ire may call the Beflection of the Formative of the Ordinal upon the 
Cardinal is not only a le^timate instroment of criticism, bnt a neces- 
saiy one. 

For 't- as a Beflected Ordinal Formative the evidence is not so good 
as that which applies to -m- ; for in the Greek we find &ctw and hrra^ 
where we fkil in finding -m- (or -n-). But we find in English sevm^ 
without the t^ and in the Scandinavian languages we find the forms ^'tf, 
and ayv^ Swedish and Danish, wherein we &il in finding either. If 
these last forms be those of the original Cardinal, there are two Be- 
fiected Ordinal Formatives. But the Greek Superlative, which, as we 
have seen, is connected with the Ordinal, is -rar-, as in iccuc^s, kcukA- 
•npos, KOKA^ar^os, If so, there are ttoo sounds of -t- to be dealt 

This leads us to a new series of facts. The Greek Comparative is 
-Tcp-. This is held to be the ^r- in trans » beyond. The train of thought 
here — to take it from the logical point of view, or that which contem- 
plates the connection and association of ideas — is that the Comporativo 
Degtee is something that transcends the Positive, the Superlative 
something that transcends the Comparative. 

The result of all this is that, between the Latin 'tim- and the Greek 
-TOT-, we are brought to the doctrine that some such form as -tamt- 
gives us the true and original Superlative. Whether right or wrong as 
a fact, the doctrine is one which is recognised, and should be known to 
be so ; in other words it is a fact in the history of philological criticism, 
whatever it may as a fact in the real history of language. 

Here, for the present, the exposition ends. It will be continued 
under the article on Numerals, 

§ 238. Forms m -^n. — ^The chief affix by which 
the name of a male is converted into that of a female, 
is in Gennan -in ; so that from freund = friend we 
get freundr4/n,n ^ femcUe^friend ; in A, S. mv/nec = 
monkj municen:=nun. 

It is a termination which is not only German, but 
Sarmatian also ; the Lithuanic giving — 

Bflj6ras nobleman bijor-eW. 

Kimlgs parson kunig-en^. 

Kirpius shoemaker kurpiuv-«n^. 

Avjuas mother's brother avjrn-0n^ (hia tp\fe)* 

XsUas ass asil-en^. 

Oindxas stork gandr-iffir, &c., &Q» 



This being the case, its absence in English is re- 
markable. The only word in which it is believed to 
exist at the present moment is viicen = female fox 
^filchainn^ in German. 

§ 239. Forma vn -^ter. — ^These were, originally, 
Female, or Feminine, forms. The old Glossaries give 
us — 




















fi>el stn 










Hec pectrix, 

a "kempster 

Hec siccatrix, 


— textrix, 

A -Webster 

— palmaria, 

a hwwdtttr 

-« pistrix, 


— salinaria, 

a aaltter 

— pandoxatrix, a hrovfster 

— auxiatrix, 


On the other hand, such entries as 

Hie pis^, a back^tore | Hie tex^, a "wehtUr 

are very rare. 

At present, however, spinster is the only represen- 
tative of what was originally a large class. 

§ 240. Collective forms. — The so-called Plurals 
which, like oooen and feet, are said to be formed firom 
the Singular by either the addition of -en, or a change 
of Vowel, are Collectives rather than tnie Plurals. 

Forms i/n -ery. — A fish&ry is not a collection of 
fishers, or fishermen, but one of fishes. A rookery 
is a collection of rooks ; and there is no such word as 
rook&r. The power, then, of the affix -^y is Collec- 
tive. Besides yeomanry and Jeivty, we have the 
rarer ones Englishry, Danish^, and Welshery, as the 

*X/£* ASD ^LAY^ ^FALL^ AND ^FELLj ETC. 281 

names of political or ethnological districts. Eyrie, gene- 
rally said to mean the nest of an eagle, is an eggery^ 
place for eggs, or collection of eggs. In the following 
words the -r is a true sign of the Plural Number. 







Indeed, in one word it occurs in pro\incial and 
archaic English, viz., childer=schild/ren. All these are 
of the Neuter Gender. 

In other words, such as foolery, prudery, bravery, 
slavery, witchery, atitchery (neecUework), &c., how- 
ever, this origin is inadmissible, and the idea of col- 
lection or assemblage is either obscure or non-existent, 
the -ry having originated out of a &lse analogy, sug- 
gested by the aflSnity of meauing of Collection and 













meamng wrUi/rig, awvnishneas, and theft, respectively. 
§ 241. Chcmge of Vowel between Transitive and 
Intransitive Verbs. — ^The following are Transitive 
Verbs derived from Intransitives by a change of the 
Vowel of the root : — 






















make to boil. 




put to flight. 
























In Anglosaxon these words were more numerous than 
they are at present. 

Yman run, 

Byman hum, 

I^ncan drink, 

Sincan sink. 

iEman maketonm* 
Bsman rnake to hwm* 
Drensan drench, 
Sencan make to sink. 

§ 242. Affixes in ^-nd, — This in the older stages of 
our language was the termination of the Active, or 
Present, Participle of Verbs; i.e. words like living 
from live^ speaking from apeak, &c., &c. ; all of which 
Tunu end in -^ng. The vowel that preceded the -?i, in 
the Middle English, varied with the dialect ; the West- 
saxon afl&x being -md, the Mercian -end, the North- 
umbrian -and. 

With this change of form we must compare that of 
the Verbal Substantive in -^ng ; wherein the -u- has 
become -^, and the two forms become Confluent. Hunt- 
ing from the A. S. huntand, with the meaning of the 
Latin Participle venans, and hunting from the A S. 
hunhcng, with the meaning of the Latin venoitio, are 
now, in respect to their form, one and the same word. 

§ 243. The Affix -ed. — This, though one of the 
most important of the English AflSxes, is one of the 
most obscure. It characterises both the Preterit Tense 
and the Past, or Passive, Participle, of words like lovt^ 
which form them by the addition of -cZ, or -^, as op- 
posed to those which form them by a change of Vowel, 
with (for the Participle) the addition of -ew., or -w — 
love, loved, loved; speak, spoke, spoken; knoWj kview, 


(a) 2716 -dm loved^^araavi ; i.e. as a Preterit Tense. 
This is held to be an abbreviated form of the word did, 
the Perfect of do; in other words, the did in the com- 
bination / did love, modified in form, and transposed 
in place ; or made to follow the verb (with which it 
.coalesces) instead of jpreceding it. 

(6) The -d in loved = aTaaius ; i,e. as a Past, or 
Passive, Participle. — This is held to be the -r in the 
Greek verbals ending in -reoj, and -ros; as irovrjros, 

More upon this point will be found in ^ 363, on the 
formation of the Preterit. 




§ 244. The Affixes of the Tliird Class are those 
in which no definite, or notable difference in meaning 
can be assigned to the words which they distinguish in 
form. Those only will be given in which, when tlie 
affix is taken away, an actual word remains ; as maid, 
maiden ; mead, meadow ; shade, shadow. That there 
is absolutely no change of sense is not asserted ; for it 
is certain that the words in each pair are not used indif- 
ferently and with equal propriety in every case. Still 
it is the change that exists between words like rise and 
raise, man and manikin ; and still less that between 
words like hun;t and hunter, or strong, strength, and 

Subject to the preceding limitation this class is 
confined, or nearly confined, to the three n<70I^<& ^^^ 



quoted. But it cannot be denied that there are many 
words like them where, although the fundamental ele- 
ment cannot be found, in English, as a separate word, 
the inference that it has existed as such is legitimate. 
The allowing table well illustrates the forms in 

"Ow: — 

' The suffix -ow 

representj, in some few substantives, an older suffix, 

(1) «, (2) too. 

(1) shadow 

0. E. 

sceadUf in Goth, skathu-s. 



meodu, medu. 

(2) callow 

0. E. 

calu. Lat. calvus. 



fealut fealwe. Lat ftUmts, 



mal-u, Lat. malva. 






salu, 0. H. G. salaw. 



geolu, Lat. ffilvus. 



swalewe. 0. H. G. sival-awa. Ger. 





sinews, seonu. 0. H. G. senawa* 
Morris: Outlines, &c., p. 212. 

In the following examples the w seems to have 
grown out of a -gr- : — 





















To a great extent this form in tc; (=i;) is Danish ; 
e.g. in Danish marv^marrow, though, in Swedish, the 
word is merg. In the Danish furre and 8purre= fur- 
row and apa/rrow the change is carried further. 

The present list of Derivational Formatives is, by 
no means, exhaustive ; and the reader is referred to 
Morris's Outlines (p. 212, &c.) for additions to it. The 
examples of the present and two preceding chapters 
have been mainly meant to indicate the principle of 
fibdr arrangement. 

IKILBCltOK. 285 




(tHEIB degrees of comparison). — ^ADVERBS. 

§ 245. Inflection now comes under notice. It is a 
eculiar kind of Derivation ; of Derivation rather than 
omposition. But it is by no means certain that a 
efinition could be framed so as to exclude all com- 
ounds without inconvenience. The word fathers, 
hether taken as a Possessive Case or as a Nominative 
iural, is a good sample of Inflection. The addition 
) the main word is the sound expressed by the single 
jtter -8. That this is not a whole word is evident. 
ly going back, however, to the Anglosaxon period we 
nd that it was preceded by a vowel — e or ct, as the 
ise might be. Now, though this gives us a syllable, 
le affix is as far from being a separate and indepen- 
ent word as ever : and, hence, it belongs to deriva- 
!on rather than composition. But what if it be both 
ossible and probable that all derivation was once com- 
osition, just as all composition was, originally, the 
ixtaposition of separate words ? The doctrine that 
ich is the case has already been alluded to. Neverthe- 
jss, for most purposes Derivation may be separated 
*om Composition, and Inflection treated as a peculiar 
nd iitiportant part of Derivation. 

Inflection falls into (1) Declension and (2) Conju- 
ation. Declension applies to (I) Gender, (2) Number, 
3) Case; Conjugation to (I) Voice, (2) Mood, (3) 
'ense, (4) Number, (5) Person. 

Noims are declined ; Verbs conjugated. Nouns 
re (1) Pronouns, (2) Substantives, (3) AdjecfcvN^^* 


Participles are, in some respects, Adjectives, in others 

To give precedence to the Pronouns over the Sub- 
stantives, and to put them first in order in the class of 
Nouns, is unusual. The prerogative, however, with 
which this invests them is justifiable. 

§ 246. The Persorial Pronouns. — The Name of the 
person speaking. — First come the Personal Pronouns, 
and the first of these is the name for the speaker. When 
N. or M., no matter what his permanent name may be, 
speaks of himself as either I or mc, I or we is a name 
for the tiTne being ; the person to whom it applies, or 
the temporary bearer of it, being, at the same time, 
the person who applies it. When applied strictly, it 
is limited to the Singular Number. But as a speaker 
may consider that what he says or does is said or 
done by others, so that, to some extent, he repre- 
sents more speakers than his single self, a Plural 
form of the First Personal Pronoim is rarely, if ever, 
wanting. No sign of Gender is required. 

§ 247. Name of the Person spoken to. — Then 
comes the name of the person spoken to. Here, also, 
the sign of Gender is superfluous. But here the Plural 
Number is no longer exceptional, or, in some degree, 
non-natural ; but, on the contrary, almost a matter of 
necessity, since a speaker may address either a single 
individual or a multitude. The import of the words 
we and us requires, when the speaker is a single indi- 
vidual, some explanation : that of ye and you, when 
more individuals than one are spoken to, is self- 

§ 248. To these two the true Personal Pronouns 
are limited. They are those of the First and the 
Second Person. They stand alone, and apajt from 
the so-called Pronoun, or Pronouns, of the Third Per- 


sans, — he^ ahe^ it (Jtit\ and they — ^in which we have 
Three Genders, and which are, historically, or in origin. 
Demonstratives. The true Personals have no Gender ; 
and they need none. 

§ 249. I arid Me, Thou and Ye. — In each of the 
true Personal Pronouns there are, at least, either two 
distinct roots, or two forms sufficiently unlike another 
to look like such. For the First Person there are the 
roots represented by I and me ; for the second those 
represented by ^ou and thee. 

I is found only in the Nominative Case, and has no 
Oblique Cases to correspond with it ; and, vice versoj 
the Oblique Cases have no Nominative. I is no Nomi- 
native Case of 7ne; nor me of J; no more (to use a 
well-worn illustration) than Puss is the Vocative Case 
of co^. 

Of the Declension of /, then, there is nothing at 
present more to say ; except that there is no Declension 
at alL The forms in m-, such as me, my, and rainej 
whether Cases or derived Adjectives, are not cases or 
derivatives of the words Ego, Ich, J, or any of the 
numerous forms in which the Pronoun of the First 
Person Singular appears ; and, vice versa, / is no Nomi- 
native of me. 

§ 250. Personal Pronouns in A. 8. — ^In A. S. the 
Declension of the true Personal Pronouns is as fol- 
lows: — 


/—found only in the Nominatiyo Case. 











us (ntic). 





(?) Oen. 



user (ore). 




(«) . 










eow (eowic). 




(?) Gen. 




The so-called Genitives are Adjectives ; and this is 
the reason for the Note of Interrogation (?). 

Seasons for treating the c in Tnec and ^ec as any- 
thing but a true sign of case are found in the familiar 
declension of hie, hcec, hoc in Latin ; wherein the c is 
a sign neither of case or gender ; nor yet of number. 
It is this -c that is not only the -c in mec and )?ec, but 
the y in my and thy. 

§ 251. 7 and We ; Thou and Ye. — In both Persons 
the Plurals are sufficiently diflTerent from the Singular 
to look like derivatives from different stems. This is the 
case with we^ our, us, whether we compare them with 
I or me ; and with ye and you, as compared with thou 
and thee. 

Neither are the Cases of the Plural itself cases which 
stand to we in the same definite and imequivocal way 
that their and them stand to they, his and her to he, or 
fathers to father. 

This is spopially the, case in the First Person ; for, 
whatever may be their relation to thou, thy, and thee, 
you and yours are evidently from the same root as ye. 

§ 252. We, Our, Us. — These, as different cases of 
the plural number, though, certainly, not so closely 
connected with one another as they, their, and ihem, 
are universally admitted to be forms of the same word. 
A difference, however, of some kind is found through- 
out all the Grerman languages. In the present High 
German wir=we, unser = our, uns = us. In Danish 
the difference is at its minimum. In Danish vi^we, 
vor=our, os=us. 


§ 253, Wt arid Me, Ye and Thau.— The difference 
between the forms of the Singular and Plural Numbers 
is more perplexing ; in other words it is easier to con- 
nect our and ua with we, than we, &c., with me, and 
ye with thou. 

In spite, however, of their external differences, it is 
safe to say that the prevalent opinion is in favour of 
their being, one and all, derivatives from the same 
root ; though, of course, greatly altered. 

§ 254. And this leads us to ask why (supposing 
that they are all from one root) the difference shoiQd 
be so great ; and that not only in English, but in other 
languages ; for we shall see that, throughout the whole 
Indo-European class, these same Personal Pronouns 
are, at least, as abnormal and multiform as they are in 
English ; and we shall, also, see that throughout the 
whole class the fundamental roots are the same. 

This, however, is only another way of saying that, 
as a class, the Personal Pronouns are among the oldest 
words of the languages to which they belong ; and, as 
such, have undergone more than usual wear and tear. 

§ 255. But this is not alL Many of their altera- 
tions can be accounted for ; indeed, are deducible from 
the nature of the class. 

The Dual Number in this matter helps a little, but 
the Dual Number is not exclusively Pronominal. The 
more important characteristic is the difference between 
the Exclusive and the Inclusive Plurals. 

§ 256. The Dual Number. — The Dual Number, as 
a rule, is found in the older stages of the language. As 
time goes on it is dropped. But, though dropped as 
a Dual, it may be retained as a Plural, or vice veracL 
If so, certain Plurals may be Duals disguised. 

This is no mere possibility. If it were, it would not 
liave been brought forward. The Latin Plurals Noh asid 




Vo8 are, word for word, the Greek Duals Nfit and S^S£. 
The Slavonian Plural agrees with the Latin. The 
Tshekh, for instance, has like the English flra=7, ttU 
and me^me and mj/, and the Plural my=we. 

The Plural, however, is Latin throughout — Latin or 
Greek according as we compare it with Vo8 or with 'S,<f>&L 

1. my 



2. was 


our— nostrum in Latin. 

3. nam 


tons — nobis „ 

4. nas 


us — nos „ 

5. 6 my 



6. w nas 


in us. 

7. 8 n&mi 


with us. 

1. wy 


vos or ff^wX. 

2. was 


vestrum or a^mv. 

3. warn 



4. was 



5. 6 wy 



6. w was 


in Twbis. 

7. 8 wami 


cum nobis. 

§ 257. There was a Dual in Anglosaxon m^=we 
two ; and in the English of the present time there is 
the word both (closely akin to the Numerals) = 6a two ; 
German beide zwei ; Danish begge to. 

This gives a second element ; for these last two words 
were Compounds. But Compounds may be so closely 
connected as to lose their compound character ; and fur- 
ther changes may eject one or the other of the original 
elements. If this be the original one, the whole charac- 
ter of the resulting word is changed. The word, in short, 
is transformed. This process must, from its very nature, 
be less evident than the previous ones. But it has been 
recognised as a matter of inference. At any rate it ac- 
counts for the phenomena. At present, however, it is 
merely given as an instrument of criticism. 

§ 256. Exclusive and Inckuawe PhircUs. — ^The 
compound chaiacter of the Plural is even more intelli- 


gible than that of the Dual ; but it is one which is 
only partially illustrated by the languages with which 
we have much familiarity. The Greek and Latin, 
along with the Slavonic, have sufficed for the illustra- 
tion of the Dual. For the Plural we must go to the 
Sanskrit. But the Sanskrit itself will need illustra- 
tion. For this we must go to some of the rudest and 
most undeveloped languages in the world : for the com- 
pound Plural in its most visible forms, even the formation 
of the Plural itself, belongs to the very infancy of speech. 

There are two sorts of Plurals ; the Inclv^ive and 
the Exclusive. A speaker may address his hearer on a 
matter in which both take a part ; which is much like 
saying yov, and /, or I and you. Or he may address him 
on a matter from which one of the two is specially ex- 
cluded ; in which case the import of his speech is *7 but 
not you^ or ^yov, but not 7.' The Exclusive and Inclu- 
sive elements are plain enough here. But which is 
which ? Upon which of the two does the speaker start 
with the notion of Inclusion or Exclusion ? Is it J+ you, 
and I-\-yoUy or I—you, and you— I? The primary unit 
is convertible according to the state of his mind. Still 
the difference between Inclusive and Exclusive Plurals 
is manifest. So is the likelihood of the term being a 
compound. So, too, the likelihood of its parts being 
dismembered, and the result being the absolute trans- 
formation of the original word. 

It is the languages in the low stages of develop- 
ment that best illustrate this class of Plurals. They 
are, (1) compounds of the name of the speaker, or the 
person spoken to, plv^ the name of some one else, after 
the fashion of a sum in addition ; and (2) when the 
compoimd becomes cumbrously long, the processes of 
amalgamation and rejection may result in an absolute 
transformation of the word. 







o -S 'a a 'i 


c5 a i -i 1 



S 49 B S 

"3 *• 2 2 2 


•C 2 fl a 
















^ 1^1 ^5 i 

3 (i^ ^ 

•1 o 'i § 



p 00 

d fl p d 


S u o 

a a a 

d d d 

•0 « 

3 ^ *« 


(d <M 

•V •5" "** "* 

5. 1 1 *i 




^ - 


O d 


6 ^'?^ 

s ^ a 





3 3 

d « 
M *si d 

•j-. _Ji Sa "^ 



ll^l j^llcil 








Si ^ « '^ 

6" ^ 5» 5 

*r« »P^ tfm ••^ 


*^ ^ ^ _ w 6 « 

-S .g .g .2 

.•a I S S 


I ? 

« '3 

V^ A >^^ •f^ <fi^ "-^ >^» 


b ^ ^^ 

VD h >• b h >-/>w 

S 19 ^ i ^ >• 'J' 

^ 4^ -^ •»* ■«^ N_^ •*' 

s t: g § 

• 1^ "P" •r* '^ 


a oQ 

•o «o «o *o 
> > > > 

.*« X 

'5. Ill 

'72 3 n 

Js ^ « o 

•^ 3 .2 .s 
& S S 


> S^ 

S -S - 

,a ^^ .a 

P P 9 



§ 260. The preceding Comparative Table is from 
Professor March's ' Comparative Orammar of the 
Angloaaxon Language.^ I have not accompanied it 
with the author's explanation ; because it is given, to a 
great extent, in symbols : which, though explained in 
the work, would take up too much room in this. The 
point, however, which it is intended to illustrate is the 
extent to which the compoimd character of the Plural 
forms disguises the simpler and more original ones: 
the adjuncts sometimes reducing the fundamental syl- 
lable to a minimum, and sometimes wholly elimina- 
ting it. He continues — 

* We. — The present High German is trir. In Old Norse it was ver. 
In Mcesogothic weis. This -s represents the sm- in the Sanskrit -«ma, 
and the Greek -fxtis in rifxus and i/ith'^we and t/e. It was originally a 
Demonstrative Pronoun =:A«, thaif or this. Here we^wivsiXDeis^cami 
= I + /<«, thatf or this. The «; is t; in the Sanskrit vayam* 

' Us. — In High German -uns. This -ns also represents the Sanskrit 

* Thee. — Gothic thcLS. The th- has become y. The -* is, again, the 
Sanskrit -sma.* 

It is only in illustration of the line of criticism 
applied to the Personal Pronouns that these notices 
have been given. For more on the subject the ' Comr 
parative Qra/m/mar^ and Dr. Morris's ^ Outlines,^ &c., 
are referred to. 

§ 261. The Declensions of Pronoun. — There are 
three kinds of Declension for the Pronouns now coming 
under notice. 

1. The first is that of the Demonstratives and In- 
terrogatives ; which is specially and typically Pro- 

2. The second is SubstantivaL 

3. The third is Adjectival ; i.e. is wholly negative, 
or, in other words, is no Declension at all. 

§ 262. The Declension of the Denumstratives ^nd 


InterrogoMvea {Rdativea). — ^The key to both the De- 
clension and the Conjugation of the present English is 
the clear appreciation of their remarkably small dimen- 
sions, and the knowledge that such inflections as occur 
are the fragments of a larger system. Ours is the study of 
what has been lost, of what has been kept, and of what 
has been changed. It applies to every part of the re- 
duced system of Inflection that we still retain ; and to 
no part is it so applicable as to the Demonstrative Pro- 

This applies to not only this and thaty but to the 
Definite Article the, and the so-called Third Personal 
Pronouns he, she, and they ; every one of which has 
come from a difierent root ; every one of which has had 
a complete Declension of its own at some time, in some 
language or another ; and every one of which is now 
found in a changed condition. With this breaking-up, 
the import of one of the roots has been altered. Nor, 
when we consider how closely allied in import they all 
are, should this surprise us. 

He was, originally, what it is now — a Pronoun of 
the Third Person rather than a Demonstrative. 

Tfie was a Demonstrative Pronoun rather than a 
Pronoun of the Third Person ; but it was also the Defi- 
nite Article, and that throughout its whole Declension. 

Se, so far as it was anything, was the Definite Arti- 
cle ; but in Anglosaxon it existed in only two forms — 
se and seo ; corresponding to the Greek 6 and 17. The 
Neuter Article was ycU ; and all the other cases, in both 
numbers, were forms of ye. But it was used, even in 
its two forms, regularly. It was Westsaxon, Old Saxon, 
Moesogotbic, and Old Norse. Elsewhere the and theo 
(thju in Frisian) were the equivalents to 6 and 17. But 
whether the Masculine and Feminine of the Nomina- 
tive Singular were se and, seo, or ye and yeo, the 



remainder of the Declension was always founded on the 
root th- : just as it is in Greek, where we begin with 
6 and 17, and continue with to, tov, lijsj r^, r^, &c« 

With this as a preliminary, the following tables lead 
us to the rest. 

Saving that in the Westsaxon ae and aeo take tlie 
place of ^e and 'peo (as they do in the Old Saxon, Moeso- 
gothic, and Norse «i, siu^aa, M6— «a, ao) the several 
declensions were as follows : — 






All Genders, 


























AU Genders. 






























All Genders, 





















For se. 

Nominative Singular Masculine se. 

Feminine sec. 



The Lithuanic is the only language which gives us 
the Declension of this word in full 

DaoiaNsioH or vbosovss. 





















































The rest is read by what we know of the language in 
its present state. 

§ 263. He and Heo. — The Feminine of ^ has be- 
come obsolete ; and seo in the shape of she has replaced 
it. 8e is wholly extinct. All the Plural forms of he 
have shared its fate, and been replaced by the Plural of 
the— they ^ there^ their. 

§ 264. The^ &c. — The Masculine Nominative Sin- 
gular is retained as the uninjlected Definite Article. 
Than and there exist only as Adverbs : the first under 
the form then as an Adverb of Time, and under that of 
than as the adjunct to the Adjective in its Comparative 
Degree. There is an Adverb of Place. The Ablative yi 
is preserved in such combinations as all the better^ so 
much the more, &c.=eo melius, eo rruigis. The Femi- 
nine Nominative yeo, and the Genitive yais, are extinct 
The Plural has replaced the extinct Plural forms of he ; 
a Pronoim of the Third Person rather than either an 
Article or a true Demonstrative. That alone reiSk»SsA 


as a Demonstrative ; and, except so far as we can call 
those its Plural, is (like the Definite Article) unin- 

§ 265. They — These — Those. — But those is not the 
true Plural of 'pe. The true Plural of pe was J?d : and, 
when pa was the Plural of }7e, pas was the Plural 
of pes (this) ; or rather pes (this) was the true Sin- 
gular of pas (those) ; and no such Plural as these then 

(a) Thd and Thei, &c. — So long as }?« is the plural 
of paty and pat itself is a Definite Article, we have no 
reason to treat a as anything but a pure vowel ; but 
when we find it spelt with a -y, as in they, or as any- 
thing out of which a -y could find its way into the 
spelling, a presumption against it* pure vocalic charac- 
ter suggests itself. Now, in the Twelfth Century, we 
find the secondary forms pei, pa, }?c, and later, in the 
Northumbrian, thae ; for during the long blank in the 
early Northumbrian period, the plural of tie in that 
dialect has disappeared, though retained in the West- 

This new element in the Ormulum is written j 
(which, as the vowel that precedes it is short, is, accord- 
ing to the peculiar spelling of that work, doubled); 
and points either to the sound of g itself or to some of 
its varieties — gh, h, kh, or y. At any rate, in words 

like pe^'Z ^^^ )^^5"5^® = ^^3/ ^^^ their, it gives us an 
element which, whether we call it consonantal, diph- 
thongal, or semi-vocalic, is never found in the older 

(b) The power of the older form pa is, as it was be- 
fore, that of either the or those. The power of the newer 
form J^ej-j, thei, or they is that of the obsolete hi ; which 
is the Plural of he, which is a Personal Pronoun rather 
than either a Demonstrative or a Definite Article* 


§ 266. ydsj )^eo«, yues, ^es, feae, yise, these. — These 
are later forms : generally recognised as transformations 
of the older 'pas. 

We now know two forms of fds, of which the original 
in -d- 0^^) aiid the present in -e- are the extremes — 
just as we had two extremes of fd — viz., J?d itself and 
J^ejj (theif they). They make four in all. 

(1) The old yds has given us these; the plural of 
/Ai«, the Demonstrative indicating comparative nearness. 
But the development of these secondary forms out of ' 
Jwz«, by no means involves the abolition of the original 
form. It may, of course, be wholly supplanted by the 
later and smaller, or more slender forms ; i.e. be lost to 
the language. But it may, also, keep its ground ; either 
as a synonym, or with a modification of import. 

It does keep its ground ; and hence out of the 
original pair, yd and J>d«, we have now two pairs — they, 
\a^ and these, \as. 

Out of these four words there are only three for 
which there is a use. 

(1) They (J?«JJ, thei) becomes the Plural of the 
Pronoun of the Third Person = Latin ULi : and we 
know the reason for its becoming so. It replaces the 
lost plural of he. 

(2) These serves as the Plural of this. 

(3) The only two remaining relations that now 
stand over are those expressed by the Definite Article, 
and the Demonstrative which indicates comparative 
distance ; and these are sufficiently akin to one another 
to be expressed by the same word, and, at the same 
time, sufficiently distinct to be expressed by two — those 
and these. 

But for the true and undoubted Definite Article 
the, since se became obsolete, has always been the ordi- 
nary form ; and that both in the Northern and the 


Southern Dialects. Meanwhile for the Plural of the 
Demonstrative of distance (the Plural of that) there 
was the original Northumbrian J^d, 'po, or thae, accord- 
ing to the dialect. 

There is no place, then, for pas. 

But what if J^d, 'pdj thai, or thae become obsolete ? 
If such be the case, there is a place for ]fd8 {those). 

Now in the Southern and Midland Dialects yd or )h> 
<Ud become obsolete, and a place was left for ^. 
* What this is we know. It is that of the present thaaSj 
the plural of that, and the opposite of these. 

§ 267. Such is the exposition of the differences of 
form, and import, connected with the strange transfer 
of import on the part of the old ^fde, and the evolution 
of the newer form these, concerning which there is 
no reasonable doubt, and, I believe, no difference of 
opinion. That the change of vowel from pas to these, 
and the obsolescence of the true plural of that Qfd, 
po) are connected, to some extent, as cause and effect, 
is probable. But on which side the influence began, 
and upon other details equally obscure, it is unnecessary 
to speculate. 

§ 268. The import, however, of the sound of -«, is 
more susceptible of investigation. The following ex- 
planation is got from two quarters : (1) the use of the 
French ~ci in -ce^ci; and (2) the Norse of the Bunic 

(a) The French ce, when it stands alone, is neither 
an Article like the, nor a definite Demonstrative like this 
and that. But it can be made equivalent to either of 
the latter by the addition of -ci or 2a as a determinant ; 
and such is, very nearly, the relation of yd to the aflSx 
-8 — provided, of course, that suflBcient reason can be 
given for considering -« to represent some separate word 
with the power of the -ci in ce^i^this. 



(6) Upon this point I adopt the opinion of that 
eminent Scandinavian scholar, the late Professor Munch. 
In his short but valuable work on the Runes, after 
stating that the Compound Pronoun ^esai is (with cer- 
tain exceptions which are not needed here) inflected 
in the ordinary manner, or as follows : — 

The t in the majoritj of cases, except the Nominative and Genitive 
Singular (t defleste Casus uden for Nam, off Gen, Sinff.) of the Prononn 
sd is declined, and the first part of the nndedined ending si or «a is 
added-on in the following manner : — 


Maac, Fern, 



\>aimsi ]>an 



)^ansi yinsa 
^nasi ^nasa 



]>atsi, — 


Ulaac. Fern, 



\>aisi (o : Mrst) ^asi (o : 


)>ausi (kun). 


]>ainui, — 



i>asi (o : ><bi) \>asi \>asi (o : 

; jHir«).— 


]>ausi (fmsi),* — 


Here, after noticing 'pesai as a compound of the 
Demonstrative se, upon which the writer seems to have 
no doubt whatever, he gives us his examples. More 
than half of them are forms of pat, and pa, with the 
broad vowel, rather than of pisai with the slender one. 
About their import, however, there is not the slightest 
doubt. They both point equally to the same degree 
of nearness or distance ; and that is, we may say, this^ 

The Accusatives pansi and pvnai mean exactly the 
same : and both mean this. There are some contexts 

KortfaUed FrmndUlmff qf dmmldsU NordUkt Bu,^^ \VA. 


in which there might be a doubt on this point ; but 
when we find on a gravestone such a sentence as — 


Hagnild, sister of Ul^ set this stone, and made this barrow after 
Gunulf her man. 

there is no doubt thanai means the gravestone on 
which it is engraven, and no other. 

§ 269. It is not maintained that the comparison 
between ce-ci and tho^ holds good on all points. But 
identity of principle with difiference in details is the 
rule rather than the exception in Philology. 

The French -d we can trace to its origin. It is the 
'd in ici= here. In like manner, though the fact is 
not so conspicuously clear, the prevalent opinion is in 
favour of the root -se, being suggestive of nearness 
rather than of distance. 

In French this -ci has its correlative -la ; denoting 
comparative distance. The French used both forms ; 
the English only one. But though two are not super- 
fluous, one is sufficient. On the other hand, we expect, 
a priori^ that when one only is used, it will be the one 
that indicates distance. But in English, where there is 
only one, the determinant falls on the pronoun expres- 
sive of nearness ; or the one that might have best stood 
without. Pro tanto this is an objection to the pre- 
sent view — but only at first sight. 

It is only in the Plural of the English forms that 
the single Determinant -a presents itself. And this is 
only natural, because precision is more needed for 
Plural and Collective than for Singular forms. The 
former are naturally more indefinite. 

Moreover, it is only in the Nominative and Acousa- 
tive that the form in d for yU is found. All the other 


cases have an -^- ; a small, or slender, vowel. In the 
declension of that the broad a runs throughout. Natu- 
rally, then, the form in a would seem to belong to the 
cases where the vowel was broad. If so, the determi- 
nant would be most wanted for those which, except in 
the Nominative and Accusative, had -i-. 

§ 270. Jfui retained in the Northumbrian -Hr. — It has been stated 
above that after the /owr forms they {thez z, thei), these (>m«, &c.)i and 
^ds (those), and >4 {tho, thae) existed concurrentlj in the Middle Eng- 
lish of the three dialects, there were three senses in which they could be 
used ; that the chance laj between ]>ds and M ; and the latter went to 
the wall. It is now necessary to add that this applied only to tho 
Southern and Midland dialects. The Northumbrian preferred thae to 
those ; and, moreover, used thir for these. 

* Of the two plurals for that, which now (13th & 14th centuries) ex- 
isted in the Northern and Midland dialects, only one was eventually 
retained by each. In the Northern dialect the surviving form was t>a 
(tha, thae)y the other form >a«, thas, beiug abserit from the Scottish 
writers, and totally unknown to the living Scottish dialects (and I 
believe also to those parts of the North of England which still retain 
the true Northern speech). In the Midland dialect, on the other hand, 
\>os (those) was triumphant, >o, tho being gradually eliminated, perhaps 
because the former was more distinctly plural^ and more distinct from 
the third personal pronoun thai and article the. 

The literary English being, in its main features, of Midland origin, 
acknowledges the Midland Demonstratives )>ise and )»os, thei^e, those . . . 
These and those have not, however, been cordially welcomed by the 
popular speech either in the North or South ; the Dorsetshire peasant 
does not say ' I think those houses better than these,' but ' I think them 
bousen better than thedsem,^ from Ags. )>^m and )>isum, dat. plurals. 
In the Northern dialect the Scotch has retained thir and iha, thae, as 
its plural demonstratives. In the North of England, although the in- 
fluence of the Standard English has been gradually driving the old dia- 
lect northward, so that thir and tha are not now, as in Richard the 
Hermit's time, heard in the neighbourhood of Doncaster, we meet with 
them as thor and theea in the dialect of Cleveland in the North Riding, 
and in Cumberland and Westmoreland, thur (sound of u in full), thor, 
are in regular use as the plural of this. But tha, thae is not now used 
in the two Western connties, which supply its place by them : ' FU gie- 
tha thur (in my hand) for them (in yours) ; ' * Thur's mi aan, them's mi 
fadther^0 an' yon's laal Jacup's.' In South Lancashire we find theae 
forms displaced by the Midland these^ thooas ; and in the Bamsley dia- 
lect of Yorkshirc tkeate seem* alio to replace the KoEOi«m thir, \i[k 

304 ' SHE ' — ' HIS ' — * HIM.' 

Scotland ihir and thae have, curiously enough, not penetrated beyond 
the Grampians, the l^orth-eastem Scotch using thys and that in the 
plural as well a» the singular : * thys beuks an' that pens.' — Dr, Murray: 
Dialect of the Southern Counties of Scotland^ p. 184. 

§ 271. In the relations between she, he, they, these, 
and those, lie nine-tenths of the details of the Deden- 
sion of the Demonstrative Pronouns. What remains 
may be treated briefly. 

She, in A.S. seo or sio, as has already been noticed, as 
the last fragment of declension of which the Lithuania 
alone gives us something like the original dimensions. 
Upon its connection with the Eeflective more will be 
said hereafter. 

In it, we have the old Neuter after the loss of its 
initial h. 

In its we have greater change. The initial h is 
dropped, and the -t inserted. This makes its a trans- 
formation of his; the A.S. form for the Neuter as well 
as the Masculine. The -t is the -^- in hit ; which is, of 
course, out of place in the Genitive. It was not until 
the end of the sixteenth century that' this exception- 
able form took root. 

Him and hvne. — The A.S. Accusative ended in -w 
— him^ ; the Dative ending in -m. 

Hi-m (ace.) This was originally a dative form, which in the 
twelfth century (in Lasamon and Orm) began to replace the Accu- 

Hi-ne. — The old Accusative was sometimes shortened to -in, and 
still exists in the South of England under the form en. — Morrises Oui- 
lineSf &c. p. 120. 

yisne and ]>es8um. — The first is a common provincial, 
as thesn. The second, as theasem, is still current in 

Em, as m ^give it 'em.' — By some this is considered 
as a shortened form of them; by others, as the AJ3. 
Accusative heom, or hem. 

* SELF ' — ' ONE ' — * OTHER.^ 305 

§ 272. The Interrogative and Relative* — These, in 
the essentials of their Declension, agree with the De- 
monstratives, and belong to the same, or the true Pro- 
nominal, system. Except, however, in the Dative. 
Singular {hwcere^ where) they have no Feminine forms. 
Like the Demonstratives, they retain the true Neuter 
sign "t ; the same as the -d in the Latin quod^ id, and 

What, and not which, is the real Neuter. 

Which is a compound — hvedik, Scotch whi-lk, 
German we4ch=swhat4ike. 

Whose =in A.S. hwcea, is an ordinary Possessive in -« 
— whoea or whd*8. The spelling which makes it end in 
-0, disguises its true nature. 

Whom. — Like him originally Dative. 

When. — ^The Accusative Masculine, preserved as the 
Adverb when. 

Where. — ^The Dative Feminine, preserved as the 
Adverb where. 

To these add tlien, there, and here, which are in the 
same relation to the and he as when and where to who. 

Why =i for what reason. From hwi, the Ablative, 
or Instrumental, of hwa {who). 

How, a variation from the same case. 

§ 273. Pronouns with a Substantival DedeTision. 
These are (1) self, selfs\ selves, selves^ ; (2) one, one% 
ones, ones*, as in one does not like to see one^s property 
wasted — my wife and little ones are well ; (3) other^ 
other's, others, others\ 

One and other are declined like ordinary Substan- 
tives. Self, like shelf, forms its plural in -v, selves, 

§ 274. Pronoun* with an Acfjectvoal DecUruion. — ^This means all thoao 
that hare not been already enumerated. They are declined like Ad^oc- 
tires. Bnt A^jectiTes are not declined at tiXL ThowgYi ^\% H& «o\'C&» 




saying nothing, that, "withont an explanation, it had better have been left 
unsaid, such is far from heina^ the case. It is merely because the A^jee* 
lives have lost a very characterbtic declension that they are, at pimeiit, 
"wholly without one. What this declension was may be seen in | 81. 
It may, also, be seen that it was of two kinds, a Definite and Indefinite 
one. The former the Pronouns never had. The latter they had, and 
this, with the exception of the Demonstratives and the Interrogatives 
(also Belatives), like the Adjectives, they have lost This is one point 
which connects the Pronoun with the A^'ective in respect te their 

Another and a more important one is that the declension was the 
same for the two, i.e. the Pronominal Inflection, in its integrity, followed 
that of the Adjectives and not that of the SubstantiTes. It is only in 
the German family that this is the case. In Latin, bonuSf bona, bonum, 
are declined like domimit, domina, regnum; and so elsewhere. In the 
German languages they are declined like he, the, or who ; or, viee venA, 
the Pronominal forms are ac(jectival. 

§ 275. The Numerals. — The difierence between the Ordinals and 
Cardinals is not a matter of Declension or Inflection. Still it is, gene- 
rally, in conjunction with the Inflections that the Numerals are con- 
sidered. For the practical purposes of tracing a langoage they an 
among the flrst words that command notice. 

Moreover, in Comparative Philology they are words which charae- 
terizo the whole Indo-European class. Indeed, in the Celtic they are 
the chief words which, as a class, are Indo-European. This means that 
they are among the oldest words in the group. 

Being such, they have been more subjected to the wear and tear of 
time and place than any others ; as may be seen by some of the exta- 
ordinary letter-changes they present. 

The following list is intended to show this ; but it shoidd be read 
with special reference to the Eeflected OrdinaL 







































rpw-f (rp^Hi) 






























































































Old Norse 






















































(Hd Norse 



















1 . Here the Sanskrit eka is the most exceptional. It is supposed to 
represent the same root as eym, ego^ ieh, and /; or, as Donaldson (? Key) 
has pat it, it means * Number One* It is also held to represent the Qreek 
Ixa-ffTos « each or each ofie— a SuperlatiTe form like (Urpmw^ h/t^ *V.)u% 



•d in the Slavonic is more likely to represent an abnormal pronandation 
of -n than a true radical soand of "d. We miss it in the other lan- 
guages. The Ordinal is no modification of the Cardinal ; but the Su- 
perlative form of a wholly different word. So it is generally'— Ladn 
primus ; Greek irpSnos ; German erate ; Lithuanic pirmas. The Aspirate 
cIs in Greek, and the v in tiinas in Lithuanic, suggest that the initial 
Towel was not wholly pure. In Greek it is remarkable for taking a 
wholly new woid for the Feminine. Contrast c7r, tda^ &, with unuM, una, 
unum in Latin. 

2, 3. — These are veiy regular. The -r in the Moesogothic ^wir and 
the Old Norse Vreir^ seems to have been a sign of the Plural Number; 
retained in the first Numeral that vjoa Plural, lakid first as compared to 
one, second as compared to two, gives us a wholly different word for the 
Ordinal, In Greek it is Sci^cpor, a Comparative form. The Engliih 
second is the Latin secundtiSf from sequor^ I follow. In Banish wa 
have anden= other. The German, however, gives gtoeite from. snoeL In 
respect, then, to its Ordinal, the second Numeral follows the same 
principle as the first, though not to the scune extent. 

4, 6. Here the -vin the English /e;^ represents an •!»• or -n-, softened. 
The ^ediUa in the Polish pi^c does the same. In the Lithuanic |Mm^' 
wc have it in full ; though in Lithuanic it is generally reduced to a 
nasalized vowel. The -que, -t€, -xc, -<f, -t, -Jc-, and -ch {Uh) in the Latin, 
&c., is certainly non-radical ; and, a fortiori, the -n in the Sanskrit 

That, in the English and Icelandic four (A.8. fiotoer) and fiorir, a 
Medial Dental, t or d, has been dropped is manifest ; for the Hobso- 
gothic fidvor, and the Latin quatuor, with the exception of the initial 
consonants, are nearly identical in form. The double -tt and -^(r in 
rirrapa and ricrcr&pts, with the single v and the Umg vowel in vto^f, 
suggests that the Medial Dental has undergone much change. 

But the perplexing element in this pair of words is the dtflerence 
between the initial consonants, which are k, t, cz, tsh, ch (the ch in 
chest), f; and gu-, which, in Latin, presents itself in guinque as well as 
in quatuor. It is mainly a Latin combination, and is the qu- in qnercus, 
which is, word for word, fir, furh, and in Swedish furu or furuh. In 
tho English quick the q- represents the Latin v in vivus, in the first 
letter, which iu the second t; becomes k. In like manner the tp in s-now 
represents the <l> of vi^s in Greek, and the k of nix (ni-k-s) in Latin. 
The history of the letter-changes suggested by tho Latin quatuor and 
qiiinque, as contrasted with four a.nd five, is very obscure. 

6. The most remarkable part about the word six is that it ends with 
tlie same letter with which it begins ; and, so doing, suggests the notion 
of a reduplication of its half. Nothing is more likely, a priori. But 
the tr in tre^', rpla, and the ihr in three, are not the names fcr 3 that 
the doctrine suggests. The doctrine, however, of Beduplication, in ths 


lowar languages, is a Tezy xational one ; indeed it is, in many cases, 
without doubt, the true one. 

7, 8, 9, 10. — The elimination of a consonant in the middle of a 
word we hare seen in the histoij of four ; and the presence, or absence, 
of an affix we haye seen in the .-$«0, 'Tc, and -^, in the names for fitfe. 
But for the last four Units we have a new &ctor, viz. the doctrine of 
the Reflected Ordinal, That nine and ten represent an earlier fM^n and 
tttiAun we can not only belieTO, but prove ; because the words nigun and 
taihuH haye been found within limits of the German family ; but in the 
Greek hrrd, HmfHi, and 94ita there is neither an -m nor an -«, and in the 
NoEse languages there is no -t Hence has arisen the doctrine that 
where we have either one or both we have a sign of the Reflected 

§ 276. Ordinalitjf and SuperlativUy, — Upon the connexion, real or 
si^yposed, between the ideas of Ordinality and Superlativity we may now 
fonn an opinion. That let and 2nd are Superlative and Comparative in 
eenee^ and that, in Greek at least, dc^cpoi is Comparative in /orm, is 
beyond doubt But it is equally indubitable that they are thus in their 
rdation* to one another, and to the rest of the numerals ; and that they 
are not the Superlative and Comparative of one and iuH), 

The great difference between these and the other dualisms with 
which the Comparative is associated is the direction of the comparison. 
In bright, brighter, brightest we compare upwards ; in first and second, 
{the following or next) we compare downwards. After this Zrd becomes 
the following or next to 2nd ; while ^th bears the same relation to 3rd ; 
and so on throughout. This is the true Ordinality, in which there is 
manifestly the prerogative of Superlativity with 1st, and a Comparative 
subordination of 2nd. Then, when we remember that every number 
is what it is solely through its relation to its predecessor, there is a 
sense of comparison through the whole series of Ordinals. But this, 
we must remember, is founded on their relations to one another, and 
not on their relations to their corresponding Cardinals. What this rela- 
tion may be forms no part of the present enquiry. At present we know 
that in some form or other there are certain elements, both logical and 
formal, common to our conceptions of Ordinality in Numerals, and De- 
gree in Adjectiros, and that some of the most complicated investigations 
in the histoiy of the names for the first ten digits are involved in the 
connexion. In the case of 1st and 2nd, we see its nature at once. With 
the rest of the Numerals we have to be reminded of it ; but when in the 
word sep'tifn-us we believe that the ^ is the t in wpmros, and the m the 
m in primus, pirmas (lithuanic) and forma (A. S.), and that the m in 
eeptem and decern is the same m transferred to, or reflected back upon, 
the Cardinal, the double character of the class must be thoroughly 
nnderstood. The relation of 3rd to 2nd and 4th is one thing ; its rela- 
tion to 3 another. 


All that has hitherto been done in the way of critidsiii has been 
done on the recognition and the affinity with the Degrees of Comparison 
only. In this respect the doctrine of the Heflected Ordinal is a safe 
instmment of criticism, and here we leaye it. 

§ 277. Eleven and Twelve. — Until within the last twenty years the 
cnrrent opinion as to the import of the combinations •4even and 4v in 
these two numerals was that it was the l+vin. leave, which in this case 
meant over or in excess. Hence, e-leven^one^ and twelve ^ttoOf otxr, or 
left This principle of numeration is at rariance with that of the Latin, 
Greek, and many other languages — where the formula is Mm-{'ideem^ 
1 + 10, B^mSi duo •¥ decern ''^ -¥10. 

But, of lato, it has been held that, by a legitimate series of letter- 
changes, this l-f may be deduced from the d-k in ZiKo, decern, &c ; in 
which case there is, in the German names for 11 and 12, nothing ex- 

This doctrine has, certainly, found favour. I have never, however, 
seen it fairly and fully exhibited, not even by Schleicher himself^ who, 
as a Lithuanic scholar, well knew the elements of an oljection to 
it. That the syllable lik has ever been found, clearly and positively, 
as a form of dek has never been pretended. All that can be said for 
it is (1) that, in giving us the sound of k where the "R^glinh com- 
pounds give that of v, it brings the forms lev and dek closer together: 
(2) that it is used not only for 11 and 12, but for 13, 14, &c, to 
19 inclusive — e.g. 11 wienolikat 12 dwalika, 13 trylika; 19 devinyaliko. 
If there were nothing beyond this, the decision might be left to the 
judgment of the critic. 

But there is a serious objection beyond it ; and this I have never 
seen recognised. Whether -lev be reducible to 4ik, and 4ik to -dek* 
is a question of some depth and complexity as a matter of Jorm, But 
that, in respect to its meaning, the Lithuanic lik- is simply the English 
word leave is a matter of certainty. In short, Hk-ti (the ^ti being the 
sign of the infinitive mood) is simply the Latin linq-uere. 

Whether this wholly demolish the doctrine to which it is opposed 
is another question. This power of lik- is certainly an objection that 
should not be kept back in the promulgation of it. 

§ 278. 7%e ' tg ' in twenty, ^c, — In Moeso-Gt>thic we find the root 
'tig used as a true substantive, equivalent in form as well as power to 
the Greek ^tK-ds — tvdim tigum \nisandjom^dxiobus deeadibus myria' 
dum (Luke xiv. 81) ; jeri \iriji tigive » annorum duarum decadwn 
(Luke iii. 28) ; Vrins tiguns sUuhrinaisemmtrcs decadan argeuteonm 
(Matthew xxvii. 3, 9). 

In Icelandic, the numbers from 20 to 100 are formed by means of 
tig-r, declined like vi^-r, and naturally taking the word which it nu- 
merically determines in the genitive case. 


Nom. Ijdrir tigir manna » four tens of men. 

Gen. ijogorra tiga manna » of four tens of men. 

Dot, Fj6rumtigiim manna » to four tens of men, 

Aee, Fjora tiga manna «i four tens of men. 

This is the form of the inflection in the best and oldest MSS. A 
little later -was adopted the indeclinable form tigi^ which was osed ad- 

§ 279. The Declension of the Substantives consists 
of the signs of (1) Number; (2) Case. 

There are two Numbers, the Singular and the 
Plural. In A. S. there was a Dual ; but only for the 
Pronouns of the true Personals. This was vnt=we two, 
git = two. But as this was only an abbreviation of we^ 
two and ye4wo, it was a Compound rather than a true 
Inflection. The Pliu-al, however, has its proper sign. 

The only Case that has a sign is the Possessive. 
It has this, to some extent, for both Numbers. All 
the other Cases are alike in form, and agree in the 
n^fative character of having no afl&x whatever. They 
are only known as Nominatives or Objectives by the 
context. In A. S., as we have seen, the Declension was 
less limited. There was, at least, a sign for the Dative ; 
and, in some instances, for the Ablative (Instrumental). 
The Moesogothic, like the Latin and G-reek, had a 
special sign for the Nominative ; and so had the Norse ; 
and so, to some extent, the High G-erman. 

The sign of the Plural is -«, or -6«, as father, 
fathers, horse, horses. 

The sign of the Possessive Singular is also -8, as 
faJthj^s, horses. 

The sign of the Possessive Plural is also -s, as 
fathers\ horses\ 

The apostrophes by which these three forms are 

* Det Oldnorske Sprogs Grammaiik, af P. A. Munch, og C. B. 
Unger, Christiania, 1847. 


distinguished are no part of the spoken, i.e. the actual 
language. They are mere expedients for making an 
artificial difference to the reader ; in other words, for 
creating for the eye a distinction which to the ear has 
no existence. 

Such is the case. The three signs are identical, 
and so &r as they separate one case from another can 
scarcely be called Inflections — certainly not if we make 
it the part of an inflection to be distvactive between 
case and case. But this is only an accident of the present 
state of our language. Originally, they were distinct. 
The Genitive Singular was -es ; the Nominative Plural 
'OS ; the Possessive Plural -a — ^a totally different affiur. 

But in the first two the vowel was dropped ; and the 
two endings became identical, or Confluent. 

To the Possessive Plural the -8 of the Singular was 

Originally, then, the inflections in -8 were distino 
tive between Case and Case, as well as between Number 
and Number. Now they require an artificial mark to 
distinguish them. But this is a point of spelling rather 
than of speech. 

In the Possessive Plural there is to the ear, a sign 
only for those few words in our language that do not 
end in -s. These are oxen, men, women, teeth, fed, 
children, brethren, and kyn. We can, and do, say the 
oxen^a horns, the merCa wives, and the like ; but we do 
not say the fox-ea-ea tails, or the fatheraea children ; 
though we might if we thought proper to do. But we 
do not. "We eschew the accumulation of -«*•• In 
Scotland there is no such strong objection to it. 

In A. S. though -ea was the sign of the Possessive 
Case, it was only this in Masculine and Neuter Nouns. 
The Feminine sign of the Possessive was -6. For this 
extension of the -a to the Feminine, see pp. 315, 316. 


§ 280* The Substantive has, in way of Declension, 
w> signs of Oeader : nothing that corresponds to the 
Masculine sign -8, as in his ; the Feminine -r, as in 
her ; or the Neuter -^, as in what^ among the Pro- 

This, at first sight, seems a sweeping assertion : for, 
80 far as Grender goes, we have abundant means of dis- 
tinguishing it. We have pairs of wholly diflFerent 
words ; as hor^e and ifnare^ hoy and girl^ brother and 
sister, and the like. 

We have pairs of Compounds ; like he-goat and she-- 
goaty man- servant and Tnaid-servanty &c. 

Of ordinary Derivatives the commonest is that in 
-^s ; as peer, peeress, duke, duchess, and others. But 
as these words are of foreign rather than of English 
origin, they are only noticed to show that they have 
not been overlooked. In the -67i of vix-en (German 
fiichsinn), and in the ster of spinster, we have native 
formd. Still, these are not signs of Declension. Their 
Plural and Possessive forms are simply those of peer, 
duke, fox, and spinner. They are not distinctive ter- 
minations like ~s in his, and -r in her. 

The Declension in the way of Gender is so frag- 
mentary in the present English that the difference is 
best illustrated by languages where the inflection is 
fuller. Thus — in the Latin pairs of words which ex- 
press difference of sex not only by the same process, 
but by the same syllables that we find in duch-ess and 
peerless, and which we may illustrate by the examples 
genitrix = a mother, and genitor = a father, the De- 
clension is as follows : — 

8m^, Norn. 
































The syllables in italics are the signs of the cases 
and numbers ; and these signs are the same in each 
word, the difference of sex not affecting them. Con- 
trast them, however, with domi/aa = a TmstresSj and 
dominus = a 7na8tet\ 

































Here the process of distinguishing the Gender, though 
not extended to every case, is widely different. In 
Oenitrix and Genitor the sign of sex is found in the 
unchanging part of the theme (or crude form). In 
Domma and Dormnua it is found on the affixes which 
indicate Case and Number. 

The bearing of this difference for the history of 
languages, and the changes they undergo between one 
stage and another, is important. The -ix in genitrix 
is preserved up to the present time in the French -ease ; 
while the inflections of words like dame {domino) are 
dropped throughout the whole Declension. There is a 
reason for this, of course ; and one which readily sug- 
gests itself. But this is the very fact which makes the 
distinction important. If we are to talk of the diffe- 
rence between the Synthetic and Analytic stages of 


anguages ; of the infiediona that are dropped durmg 
.he passage from the one to the other ; of the law, or 
lomething akin to one, which impresses these changes 
vith the character of order and regularity ; of the sub- 
ititutions in the way of prepositions for the case- 
jndings, and of auxiliary verbs for the signs of tense, 
nood, and voice ; and of other similar concomitants — 
f we are to do this, the least we can do is to guard 
igainst confounding those parts of a word which are 
nost specially involved in these changes with those 
ivhich, comparatively speaking, have but little to do 
with them. 

Such words as viccen and spinster are words like 
jeniti'ix ; and not words like domina. Nor are there, 
it the present time, among the English Svbstantives^ 
iny words whatever like doniina. During the earlier 
stages, however, of our language there were a few ; e.g. 
maga = cognatus, socius ; mage = cognata, socia ; 
widuwa^widuus ; widuwe= vidua. Of the oblique 
cases the most characteristic was the Possessive, which 
ended in -«, and not in -s. 

Tlie suffix -«9 originally belonged to the genitive singular of some 
nascnline and neuter substantives ; it was not the genitive sign of the 
feminino until the thirteenth century, and then for the most part only 
n the Northern ilialcct (q). Lady-day with Lord^t day), — MarriSt Out- 
lines, 4'c.f § 98, p. 102. 

Again, in respect to the Possessive Plural — 

Late in the fourteenth century wo find traces of the old plural 
>nding in -Me, -en (-«ia), as king-en -• of kings (Piers Ploufman). 

Probably before the thirteenth century -es began to take its place : — 
\lre louerdes louerd; and aire kingene king. — Old English Homilies. 
^ond Series — Jbid. 

Again, in respect to the distinction of Gender in 
j;eneral — 


* Traces of grammatical gender were preserved much longer ia 
some dialects than in others. The Northern dialects were the first to 
discard the older distinctions, which, however, survived in the Soutbem 
dialect of Kent as late at least as 1340. 

# # # 

Therthe schok, the sonne djrm becom 
In thare tt/de.* — Shoreham, 

Here the inflection of the demonstrative shows that tyde is femi- 

* Be there virtue the guode overcomth alle his vyendes thare dyereH, 
the wordle, and thet vlees. — Ayenbite. 

D*;evel is masculine ; wordle feminine ; and i^ess neuter.' 

Id. : Outlines, &c 

§ 281. The termination i/n -«. — ^We have seen that, 
though the three existing signs of Declension were ori- 
ginally distinct, they have since become Confluent, and 
are now identical. All, or neariy all, that still remains 
for consideration are the principles and details that the 
sound and form of this affix in -8 exhibit ; for the 
question henceforth will be not so much the import of 
-8 in its character of a sign of Case, as the changes it 
undergoes as a sound according to the conditions under 
which it is attached to its theme. For these we are, 
to a great extent, prepared by what we know concerning 
the incompatibility of Surds and Sonants in immediate 
contact with each other ; and also concerning the diffi- 
culty of pronouncing two identical consonants consecu- 
tively. This enables us to anticipate certain changes. 
Some of these are absolutely necessary, as parts of a 
general law of Euphony or Phonesis. Some are not 
necessary ; but deduced from the practice of the par- 
ticular language. This we shall see as we proceed. 

§ 282. The -« of the Possessive PluraL — This -«, 
in the present English of England, with the exception 
of a few words like men, teeth, &c., where there is not, 


already^ an -a in the Nominative, is a fiction rather 
than a reality ; in other words, it is a sign of declension 
which addresses itself to the ear rather than to the eye, 
and, so doing, is no sign of declension at all ; for 
though we use such forms as meitd', hrethren8\ chU- 
dren8\ we avoid such as the fatheraes child/ren, the 
aiateraes brethren^ the masteraea men. The difference, 
however, we indicate in writing. 

The f other's children means the 
children of <me father ; 

Thesistef's brethren, the brethren 
of one sister; 


7%e fathers* children means the 
children of different fathert ; 

The sisters* brethren, the brethren 
of d^ereni sisters ; 

The master's men, the men of one 

The owner's oxen, the oxen qfone 

The masterff men, the mien of 
different masters ; 

The ownertf oxen, the oxen of 
different owners. 

This avoidance, however, of the accumulation of 
esaea is English rather than Scotch, In Scotland the 
practice is as follows : — 

The Possessive Plural in Ags. ended in -a, -ra, -na, but this termina- 
tion has disappeared in the modem dialects, which have replaced it by 
a new form in *s, after the analogy of the singnlar. In the literary Eng- 
lish this appears in fhll only whore s is not already the plural ending, as 
in men, sheep, mice, poss. men*s, sheep* s, mia^s; when the plural ends in s, 
euphony requires the second j to bo omitted and its place indicated by 
the apostrophe alone : thns, boi/i for boy/s. But in our dialect this en- 
phonic contraction does not take place, and thus the possessive plural, 
as well as the singular, is regularly formed by adding *s to the nomina- 
tive. Thus, the kj^^s huoms, oow*s horns, the meyc^s huoles, mice's holes, 
the baim^sclease,\he children's clothes, the farmeries kye, farmers' cows, 
the doags*s lugs, dogs' ears. As in the singular the apostrophe must be 
pronounced as a connecting Towel after s sounds ; men's, kye's « (menz, 
kaiz), but baims's, doags's, meyce's « (bemztz, doogziz, mdstz). — Mur- 
ray, Dialect of the Southern Counties of Scotland, p. 164. 

§ 283. The aownd of -« <w Surd or So7iarU. — 


General as is the use of the letter -s as a sign of the 
Possessive Singular and the Nominative Plural, it is a 
sign in the way of spelling rather than of speaking. 
We apeU as if it were 8 ; but, in the great majority of 
cases, we sound it as z. 

In some cases we are obliged to do so — 

1. Thus: slabs, slaves, lads, blades, dogs, &c., are 
words which we can spell, but which we cannot pro- 
nounce. We pronounce them slahz, slavz, ladz, blddz, 
dogz, &c. 

2. Words like hiUs, drums, kens, bars, days j fleas, 
bows, &c. we can pronounce as they are spelt ; but we 
do not. The s, in all these words, and in all words like 
them (i.e. all words ending a liquid or a vowel), is 
sounded as a z. 

3. If the last soimd of the singular be that of «, sr, 
the sh in shine, or the z in azure, the addition is that 
of the sound of the syllable -^z (spelt -e«) ; as losa-ez, 
kiss-ez, blaz^z, haz-ez, blush-^ez, lash^z, spelt lass-es, 
hiss-es, blaz-^, haz-es, blush-es, lash-es. 

The true rule, then, for the Inflections of the Sub- 
stantive is that it consists of the addition of the 
sound of s modified according to the te^^mvaation of 
the root 

Such is the rule as one of Phonesis in general. 
The exceptions to it, or the words wherein the final 
soimd of the fundamental word is accommodated to that 
of the affix, form a small, though somewhat obscure 
class. The change in this final consonant of the main 
word is, from Surd to Sonant, and the Surd thus 
changed is always one of the Conti/nuous divisions; 
i.e. the change is either from th to dh, or firom / 
to V. 
• (1) From th to dh. — This division contains the 
words oath, youth, bath, path, and others ; but the evi- 


dence as to the extent to which each individual word is 


^shanged is obscure ; inasmuch as, whatever may be the 
sound, the spelling is the same. There are, certainly, 
some speakers who pronounce the plural forms baths^ 
TnouthSj oaths, paths, truths, &c., as if they were spelt 
hathce^ Tnouthce^ oaihce, pathce, truthce, &c. ; i.e. with 
the 8 sounded as in seal. But it is equally certain that 
others pronounce it as if the words were spelt badhz, 
moudhz, oadhz, pathz, trudliz, i.e. with -s soimded as 
the z in zeal. 

(2) JVowi / to V. — Here we limit ourselves, in the 
first instance, to words of English, such as loaf, knife, 
Ac., as compared with words like chief and brief of 
foreign origin. 

(a) Final -/ preceded by a long vowel — leaf, sheaf, 
thief, loaf; in the Plural leaves, sheaves, thieves, 
loaves. Exceptions : reef, reefs ; oaf, oafs ; hoof, hoofs ; 
roof, roofs. 

(6) Final -f preceded by 4 — coif, hxdf—df, self, 
shelf — wolf: in the Plural calves, halves — el/ves, selves, 
shelves — wolves. 

(c) Final / preceded by -r — scarf ; in the Plural 
scarves. That this is thus spelt and soimded is certain. 
With dwarves and wharves from dwarf and wharf the 
spelling is exceptional, and, in all probability, the pro- 
mmciation more so. 

(d) Final / preceded by i sounded as the 'ighr in 
night— knife, life ; in the Plural knives, lives. Excep- 
tions : fife, fifes ; strife, strifes. 

In all these words the Possessive Singular keeps to 

the original -/- ; and that both in speaking and speU- 

^he loafs weight; the knifes edge; the leafs 

4. Plural of words ending in a vowel or a 
%g. — ^Here we have the addition of -9, as usual : 


and, as usual, it has the sound of -0, inasmuch as the 
vowels and diphthongs, in English, affect the sibilant 
which follows them just as it is affected by a Sonant 
Mute. In this there is nothing particular. The par- 
ticular question which presents itself concerns the char> 
racter of the vowel. It may be either long or shorL 
It may be long like the -oes in cargoes, and embargoes^ 
or like the -ee in -6ees, and the -ea in fleas ; or it may 
be short like the -le- in ladies, cities, valOSys^ &c., 
which are sounded ladiz, dtiz, vaUiz, rather than 
ladeez, dteez, valleez, &c. 

This depends upon two points : (I) the character of 
the vowel as Broad or Slender ; and (2) the nature of 
the syllable as Accented and Unaccented: the rules 
being as follows : — 

(a) When the syllable is accented, the Vowel, 
whether Broad or Slender, is long ; as days, waySy 
blows, snows, hoes, pews, flews, flies, sighs, boys, hoys, 
teas, seas,flsas. 

(b) When the Vowel is uTiaccented, the vowel, if 
broad, is long ; if slender, short; as caraways, run- 
aways, holidays, cargoes, embargoes, heroes, echoes, 
grottoes, folios, cuckoos; but words like lady, baby, 
vaUey, money, &c., give ladies^ babies, valleys, moneys, 
&c., sounded ladiz, babiz, valliz, moniz, &c. 

This is the role when we consider the language as it is 9poken : the 
distinction between the Broad and Slender, and the Long and Short 
Vowels, being the basis of the distinction in speech. The exposition of 
details is generally founded on the spelling. 

It cannot be said that there is much difference in the result. It mat- 
ters very little, in practice, whether we say the slender vowels are long 
* when the syUahle is accented^* or * when the word is a monosyllable ; * in- 
asmuch as it is only in monosyllables that the final syllable (which is also 
the first) is accented at all. And there are other cases where the practice 
is equally indifferent. Still, in language wo must look to the speaking 
rather than to the writing. Moreover, if it were not so, the artificial 
ch\racter of our orthography would condemn it ; and in this port of our 



etjmology it is more than UBually artificial. EverythiDg conceals the 
tme nature of the words which, in speaking^ end in vowels. 

It is probable that at least four-fifths of the words connected with 
the spelling of them, end in either -e, as made, &Cm or -y, as quantity^ 
See. But as the -e is mute, the true ending of the words in which it ap- 
pears is consonantal. Then -y, when unaccented, is sounded as the e 
in be; when accented as y in by. Finally, come the words like shadow, 
ikoroygh, through, &c., where the vowel was originally followed by a 
oooBOoant ; in other words was anjrthing but final : the fact being that 
true vowel endings are very rare in the older English. 

§ 285. The -«- m 'houses,^ — In house the -« is 
sounded as in seal ; in houses as -0 in zeal {houziz). 
The change may be due to the influencfi of the final -s ; 
which, as following a vowel, is changed into its corre- 
sponding sonant. 

Of the * * * change of e and th into their voice sounds, e and 
dhj in the plural, recognised in the English pronunciation of houses, 
mouths, truths, etc. (heuzyz, moudhz, truudhz), I do not find any traces 
in the Scottish dialects. — Murray, ^c, p. 158. 

To this class of exceptions belong the words 
pence and dice. • In both the form is collective rather 
than plural. Siaspence means not six separate pennies^ 
but a single coin, equivalent to them, while dice means 
a pair of dies for the purpose of gaming rather than a 
number of dies for the purpose of stamping. This 
tells us why the s is sounded as in seal rather than as it 
is sounded in zeal. 

Why the words are spelt with a -ce is a matter of 
Orthography. If spelt with -5 they would run the risk 
of being sounded as pens and dies (penzy diez)^ and if 
there were no mute e to follow the c, the result would 
be the forms penc and diec, which would run the risk 
of being sounded dyke and penL 

§ 286. Eaves — peas^ &c. — Up to this time the -s 
under consideration, whatever may have been its sound 
or its import, has always been the sign of either a 


322 'riches' — ^pains' — 'NEWSj BTO. 

Possessive Case or a Plural Number. It is dear, how- 
ever, that it may present itself under another character, 
and, what is more, may create ambiguities by doing so. 
It may be no sign of either Number or Case ; no aflSx 
at all ; but, on the contrary, a part of the fundamental 
word or theme. Should such a singular have a colUo" 
live sense, the -8 may make it take the guise of a 
Plural. Such words are — 

(a) Eaves; in A. S. yfea, efeae^edge; a purely 
German word. 

Pox=pock-8. — The -« is no part of the original 
word — pockmark, pockTnarked, 

Alms ; in A. S. celmesse ; and, as such, an old woid 
in our language ; though not a Grerman one ; but, on 
the contrary, from the Greek tKst)fjLO<rvvrf. 

Summons. — From the French semonsej somons. 
Plural sumrnxms-es. — Morris, § 91. 

Riches. — Word for word the French richesse, but 
doubly disguised; (1) by the change of accent, and 
(2) by the change of the sound of -«8 to that of z. 

Pains, m^ans, amends. — From the French peine, 
moyen, and amende. Substantives. 

News. — From the French nouvelles, Anglicised in 
form, and, as an English word, an Adjective with a 
Substantival Plural. 

(c) Peas. — Derived from the Latin pisum. Hence, 
the '8 is, in origin, no sign of Number, but the -s of 
the theme, or fundamental word. Pisa^ peases, and 
peasen, all found in the early stage of our language, 
are better forms. ITie most irregular form, how- 
ever, is the singular itself, i.e. pea deprived of its final 
consonant. The principle of the confusion is clear. 
Pea^ passes for a Plural ; and pea is deduced from it 
as its Singular. 

(d) Physics, Optics, Politics, Ethics^ Pneumor 

^MEK —^FEETj ETC. 323 

ticB^ Hydraulicsj Mechanics, Dynamics, Statics, &c* 
—All these are of Greek origin, and all derived from 
Adjectives of the Plural Number and the Neuter Gen- 
der. This for i^wtikos^ connected with, or relating to 
^vtTi9^nature, was ^vaiica. The Feminine Singular 
of the same word was i^vaiicq. From this feminine and 
singular form are derived the words like Physic, and 
the corresponding series of scientific terms in French, 
which end in ^ique, and are all, in form, singular. 
From the neuter and plural are derived those like Phy^ 
sics, &c., in English. 

§ 287. Signs of Number not ending m -s. — Be- 
sides the usual plural forms in s, there are four 
other methods in English of expressing a nun^ber of 

(1) Change of vowel. — ^This class consists in the 
present English of the following words — 

1, 2. Mem, singular ; men, plural. The vowel a 
changed into the vowel e. The plural of woman is, to 
the ear, wimmen, i.e. it has the vowel changed. 

3. Foot, sing. ; feet, pi. The vowel oo (sounded as 
the u in could) changed to the vowel ee. The Old 
Saxon has fdti. This suggests the notion that the 
present -ee (in A. S. fet) is the result of Umlaut ; the 
change from -o- to -ee- being retained after the aflSx -i, 
which initiated it, has been lost. How far the process 
explains all the cases of a similar change is another 
question. The words in which this real, or apparent. 
Umlaut occurs are Collectives rather than true Plurals; 
indeed, feet is such to a certain extent, though not so 
decidedly as mice, lice, and geese, and still less so than 
teeth ; which is as much Singular as Plural. Now, in 
Welsh, and other languages, we get the apparent para- 
dox of a Singular formed from a Plural ; which is not 
quite the case, the real fact being that the older form 

y 2 





is a Collective ; from which is formed a Singular. This 
is a caution against referring too much to the sole 
action of Umlaut. 

4. Tooth, sing. ; teeth, pi. : goose, sing. ; geese, pi. 
The vowel oo (as in food) changed to ee as in feet 

5, 6. Mouse, louse, sing. ; Tnice, lice, pi. The diph- 
thongal sound of ou is changed to that of i (as in night). 
The combination ce used instead of se, for the same 
reason as in pemAie and in dice, i.e. lest, if written mise, 
lise, the words should be pronoimced mize, lize, 

(2) Addition of -en ar-n. — In the present English 
the word oxen is the only specimen of this form in 
current use. In the older stages of our language the 
number of words in -en was much greater than at 


B hoMe or stockings 


= shire-s 


=3 shoes 


a daughters 


« eye-s 


=» sisters 


=s bishojhs 


— uncles 


= elder-s 


« trees 


= arrows 


=a soldiers. 

The -en in oa^en is the -an of the so-called weak De- 
clension, for whatever may be the case with the other 
instances ox was certainly a weak substantive. 

(3) Children. — ^Here the analysis is child-er-en, 
the -en being the en in ox-en, and the er or -r that of 
child-er, which is the ordinary Northumbrian form. In 
A. S. the r was followed by an -u, the sign of the no- 
minative case in the original word: but when lam-, 
after becoming ^m-(er)-u, undergoes contraction, the 
euphonic insertion of 6 between the m and the r takes 
place ; and then, because the letter presents itself in 
the plural, it passes for a part of the simpler singular 

^rTNEf ETC. — ADJEOnYES. 326 

(4) CoTrdmuxHon of two of the preceding methods. 
— Three words occur in this class. 

1. Kyne=cow8; a plural formed from a plural by 
the addition of -n ; as cow^ kye, ky-ne. Kye is found 
in provincial English, and cy in Anglosaxon. 

2. Children ; a plural formed from a plural by the 
addition of -en ; as childj child-er^ child-er'^n= 

3. Brethren ; a plural formed from a plural by the 
addition of -en ; as brother^ brether (?) or brethre, breth^ 
ereuj brethren. 

§ 288. Operative and Obsolete processes. — By adding the Bound of 
the -s in seal to tlie word father, we change it into fathers. Hence the 
addition of the sound in question is the process by which the Singular 
form becomes Plural. 

The process by which ox is changed into ox-en is by a similar addi- 
tion of the syllable -«», with a power sufficiently allied to that of the 
-s in fathers, to make both forms pass for Plurjil. 

Now whether the meanings of these two affixes are, or are not, equally 
Plural, is another question. The fact which wo now notice is that of 
the addition of -s being a process now in operation, and activity, which 
the addition of -en is not. If a hundred new substantives were intro- 
duced into our language next year, not one of them would form its 
plural after the fashion of oxen —-nor yet after that of teeth, or mice. 
Indeed, they would, one and all, form it in -s ; and in nothing else. 
This is a single instince of the difference between a living, vital, effix^tive, 
active, practical, current, or operative (it matters little what we call it) 
process, and a dead or obsolete one. It is a single instance, however, 
out of many. Most of our Inflections are obsolete. There are two 
sign* of Tense in our Verbs ; one ending in -cf or -ed, or -t (call, called), 
and the other formed by chanpring the vowel {spetik, spoke). But no 
new Verb will ever form its prist tense on the latter mo-Jel. As for the 
Declension of the Pronouns, for all that we have said as to its historic 
importance, and the amount of old cases ami genders that it has pre- 
served, it is, from first to last, as an Operative system, wholly obso- ■ 
leto. This is the difference between Operative and Obsolete process on 
a large scale. 

§ 289. The Adjective. — Of tnie signs of Inflection 
the Adjective, in the present English, has not one. 



In the Anglosaxon stage of our language (as may 
be seen in § 81) it had an excess rather than a de- 

But though they are not true Inflections, the degrees 
of Comparison must be noticed. 

§ 290. The Comparative Degree. — This can be formed from the 
simple adjective by the addition of -er^ as cold-erf rkh-er, dry^cr, &c. 
The process is a remarkably regular one ; and the forms that require 
special notice are few. 

Near^ nearer. — The first of these forms was in A.S. nedh ; with 
nearret near, and nyr for its comparative. Hence, the present -r in 
near is no true r at all, but the arr in idearr and Mariarr noticed 
p. 250. 

Farther. — This is the comparative of far ; and means more far, or 
more distant. 

Further.— This is the comparative of fore ; and means more forward, 
more in front. In A.S. fyr^re. The dental {th, d) occurs in the 


Former. — In A.S. forma was the Superlative of fore ; the -wi- being 
the -m- in the Latin primus, and the Lithuanic pirmas, 

§ 291. 7^ Superlative Degree. — So far as its form goes, the Super- 
lative is derived from the Positive by the addition of -est; as cold-est, 
rich-est, low-est, dry-est^ from co/rf, rich, low, dry. 

The only forms that require special notice are those that look the 
simplest; viz. those in -most, &8 midmost, foremostj ^c. But these we 
have already explained. To forms like the following, themselves Super- 











seftema • 














was added a second sign of Superlativity, -st. This does not mean that 
no such compound has not been formed by the simple addition of most 
as a whole word. No absolute rule can be given in cases of this kind. 
Hence, in the present English, the different parts of the syllable 
most come from different quarters. The m is the m in the Anglosaxon 
words innema, &c. ; whilst the -st is the common sign of the superla- 
tive. In separating, then, such words as midmost into its component 
parts, we should write — 






not mid-most 

— Qt-most 

— np-most 

fore-m-O0t not fore-most 
in-m-ost — in-most 

hind-m-ost — hind-most 

In certain words the syllable m-osi is added to a word already 
ending in er ; that is, to a woid already marked with the sign of the 
comparative degree. 







Here the addition is tnoit, as a simple word ; and the result is a Com- 
pound — ^not a J}erivatit}e. 

Having accoonted for the ira in the words just mentioned, we can 
account for the m in the word former. The superlative "wta forma, and 
foTTner was a comparative, catachrestically, derived from it. 

§ 292. Comparison of Adverbs, —AdyerhSf like adjectives, take de- 
grees of comparison, though not to the same extent. In the sun shines 
bright, the woid hright means brightly ; and although the use of the 
latter word is better grammar, it is not better English. 

The sun shines to-day brighter than it did yesterday , and to-morrow 
it wHI shine brightest — Here the sense is adverbial. 

In words like oftener and seldomer the adverbial comparison is be- 
yond doubt. 

Adverbs, then, take the degrees of comparison : and not only do 
they do this, but the history of their forms is important In Anglo- 
Saxon there were tuM) forms ; one in -re and -este, the other in -or and 
•est. Now the first of these was the form taken by ac^ectives ; as se 
seearpre sweord « the sharper sword, and se scearpeste stoeord » the sharp- 
est sword : the second, the form taken by adverbs ; as, ^e* sweord scyr^ 
seearpoT'^ihe stoord cuts sharper, and se sweord scyr^ scearpost^the 
sword cuts sharpest. 

More than this — the adverbial form had a tendency to make the 
preceding vowel full: the adjectival, a tendency to make it small. 


Comparative. Superlative. 

























Of this change, the word last quoted is a still existing specimen, as 


ddf elder, and older^ eldest and oldest. Between the two forms, how- 
ever, there is a difference in meaniqg, elder being used as a substantive, 
and having a plural form, elders. A more important word is rather. 
Here, we pronounce the a like the a in father, or full. Nevertheless, 
the positive form is small, the a being pronounced as the -a- in father. 
Bathe {rather, rdthest) are Ac^ectival forms ; (rathe) (pronounced as the 
faih' in father) ; rather, and (rathest) are AdverbiaL 

§ 293. The Masogothic Comparative and Superlative in -s, or -z. 
— The formulas which give us the difference between the Degrees of 
Comparison have been given as they are found in the generality of gram- 
mars ; and, it may be added, that they are of remarkable simplicity and 
regularity. The doctrine, too, of the connexion between the Comparatives 
in 'Cr and words like under, over, whether, either, &c. (for which see § 236), 
wherein there is a notion of dualism, or duality, in a more general 
sense, has been recognised. Finally, no explanation has been given of 
the words worse and toorst. 

There is a reason for this. The 'S- in the words worse and worst va 
involved in an explanation which introduces a new element into our 
criticism, and one which, to some extent, invests the ordinary process 
with an artificial, or non-natural, character. 

The Comparative Degree is formed from the Positive by the addition 
of -er, the Superlative by that of -^t. Nothing is much simpler than this. 

But the Superlative may also be formed from the comparative by 
changing the r of the comparative into s, and adding t ; as dark-i r, 
dark-es, dark-es-t, cold-er, cold-es, cold-es-t, &c. This is anything but 

"We can understand, however, why it must be recognised when we 
ask what was the comparative of the Moesogothic. It was not formed 
by the sound of -r, but by the sound of the sibilant -3, ts, or z : and 
words like ald-iza, hat-iza, sut-iza, were the original forms of what be- 
came in old High-German alt-iro, beis-iro, suats-iro, and in English, aid- 
er, bett-er, swect'Sr. 

Vairsiza, then, in Moesogothic was the form of the 0. H. G. wirsiro. 
the M. G. G. wirser, the 0: S. versa, the A. S. vi/rsa, and the 0. N. verri, 
the Danish varre, the Swedish vdrre. 

The Moesogothic form in the sibilant introduces a serious complica- 
tion in the doctrine of dualism ; and I do not know that it has been 
successfully unravelled. 

§ 294. Defect and Complement — For good^ as a 
positive form, there are now no such comparatives and 
superlatives as gooder and goodest Hence, good may 
be called defective. For better and best there is, now, 
no such positive form as bet This is defect again. 


But what is wanting in the way of degrees of com- 
parison between the two roots is made up by the other. 
And so it is in other cases. 

This brings in the distinction between a sequence 
m Logic and a sequence in Etymology. 

The ideas or notions of thou^ thy, theCy are ideas 
between which there is a metaphysical or logical con- 
nection. The train of such ideas may be said to form 
a sequence, and such a sequence may be called a logical 
one. The forms thou^ thy, thee, are forms or words 
between which there is a formal or an etymological 
connection. A train of such words may be called a 
sequence, and such a sequence may be called an etymo- 
logical one. In the case of thou, thy, thee, the etymo- 
logical sequence tallies with the logical one. In the 
case of /, my, me, the etymological sequence does not 
tally (or tallies imperfectly) with the logical one. Ap- 
plying this to words like good, better, &c., we see at 
once, that, whilst some are deficient in their Compara- 
tive and Superlative, others are deficient in their 
Positive forms. The defective character, however, of 
this class of words is not all. It must be remarked that 
the forms which one word wants are made good by those 
which another possesses. Hence, there is not only Z)e- 
fect, but what may be called Complem£nt also. The 
word good fills up what was wanting to the forms 
better and best 

These relations between defect and complement will 
meet us again and again. Simple Defect is common 
in language. Defect combined with Complement is not 
uncommon. Irregularity, with which they are often 
confounded, is a very different phenomenon, and, com- 
paratively, at least, a rare one. 

§ 295. Retrospect, Amount of Declension. — We 
have now gone through that part of Grammar which is 


ordinarily assigned to the Noun, whether Pronoun or 
Noun Proper ; and, in respect to Nouns Proper, we have 
considered both the Substantive and the Adjective (or 
the Nouns Substantive and the Nouns Adjective), as 
opposed to the Pronoun ; which wrongly (as will be 
argued hereafter) is held to be something less than the 

We have notified the manifest and imdoubted dif- 
ference between forms like genetrix and forms like 
domina ; the latter only of which gives us Declension 
in the way of Gender, a true declension ; and we have 
seen that^ in the present English, no such feminine 
substantives as domina are to be found, though there 
are plenty like genetrix. 

Among the Pronouns, in the -t of it, that, and what, 
we have found a true instance of Gender expressed by 
Declension ; not, however, after the fashion of domma, 
but after that of id, illud, and qvA)d. But the declen- 
sion of the Pronouns is diflferent from that of the Sub- 

That of the Adjective is also dififerent from that 
of the Substantive, but identical with that of the 
Pronoun — diflferent from what it is in the Latin and 

Of this Pronominal Declension the Adjectives of the 
present time are wholly denuded. 

Hence, if we wish to measure the extent of our 
Inflections in the way of Declension, or, in other words, 
the Inflection, of the Noun, we must take the Substan- 
tive and the Pronoun together, and ask what it amounts 
to. But before doing this we must recognise two limi- 

One of these has already been indicated. An Obso- 
lete Inflection, though we cannot exactly say that it is 
not an inflection* at all, is certainly one of an imper- 


feet character. At any rate, there are degrees in what 
we call the efficiency of inflectional forms, as Operative 
or Obsolete. 

There are, also, degrees in their efficiency in another 
respect. An affix, or any other characteristic, which is 
limited to a single function, and has only one import, 
is, certainly, more Distinctive than one which has seve- 
ral functions, and is common to a variety of words. 
Thus, while the Greek and Latin distinguish the Geni- 
tive Singular, the Nominative Plural, the Genitive 
Plural, and the Third Person Singular Indicative by 
inflections, as -ot;, -o£, -o>i/, and -£t (X0701;, XcPyot, XcKyayv, 
Xfyti), and as -4, -a, -orum, and -at {regniy regrva^ &c.), 
the single sign -a, in English, serves for all four. 

The merest modicum of reflection tells us that this 
distinctive character is one of the most natural con- 
ditions of an inflection. But what is the case in 
English ? In the older English it was much what it is 
in Latin and Greek. The old sign of the Genitive Sin- 
gular was "€8 ; that of the Nominative Plural, -as ; 
that of the Third Person Present -eth. But the e 
has been lost in the first of these three forms, and 
the a in the second, whilst in the third there has 
been a double change ; for not only has the e been 
dropped, but the -)? has become -8, and the signs of the 
three originally different parts of the Noun and Verb 
have become identical, so that the differences in func- 
tion can only be inferred from the context. 

In Greek and Latin, and in the older English, we 
might know by the mere inspection of an isolated word 
in -ov, -o*, or -ti — i, a, or at — e«, as, or -«^A, what the 
distinctive character of the last syllable was. In the -8 
of our Genitive Singulars, our Nominative Plurals, our 
Genitive Plurals (to a certain extent), and our Third 
Persons Singular of the Present Tense of the Indicative 


Mood of the Verb, we have only oue sign of Inflection ; 
and when the fundamental word ends in -8, as in 
cdms^ &c., we do not know, except through informa- 
tion from another quarter, whether it is an Inflection 
or not. All this deprives our signs of Inflection — I 
had almost said our single sign — of the element of 
Distinctiveness. Not, indeed, wholly, but to a great 
extent ; and the fact of its doing so deprives them of 
much of their import as Inflections. That this Indis- 
tinctiveness belongs rather to the present stage of our 
own particular language than to language in general, 
we have seen. But we must take our language as we 
find it, and value our Inflections accordingly. It is 
certain that they are not, now, such good inflections 
as they were at first, and this is just what we have seen 
to be the case with obsolete inflections like the -t in 
thatj &c. So far, then, as Inflections, to fulfil their 
proper functions, are either Operative or Distinctive, 
we have but few of them. 

What have we when we take in as many as we can ? 
And what have we when we take them with what I hold 
to be their legitimate, and in certain cases, their neces- 
sary, limitations ? 

By going to the Pronouns we may get (1) the 
Neuter in -t ; (2) the Feminine Grenitive in -r ; (3) the 
Masculine Accusative wherij preserved as an Adverb of 
Time ; (4) the Femibine Dative wherSj similarly pre- 
served as an Adverb of Place ; and (5) the instrumental 
why, and the the in all the Tnore, &c. 

All these are Distinctive. On the other hand, they 
are all Obsolete. 

Whether we admit these drawbacks or not is a point 
upon which there may be differences of opinion. One 
thing, however, is certain, viz., that, if we do admit 
them, the whole Declension of the Noun consists in the 


BOiind of the letter -« and its Sonant variety — in this 
and nothing more. 

Nevertheless, this, with the limitations suggested, 
is the Declension of the Nomi, and if more than usual 
has been said about it, there is a reason for saying it. 

The same, rautatia mutandis, will be said when 
we have considered the Conjugation of the Verb. 

The two will give us the amount of our Inflection^ 
and when we have seen how small this is, we shall have 
a fair measure of the extent to which our language is 
Analytic rather than Synthetic. Indeed, it is the most 
Analytic language in the world ; a fact of no slight 



— 'indeterminate^ and 'finite,' as names. 

§ 296. Verbs of txuo kinds. Indeterminate and 
Finite. — ^The Verb which will be considered in the pre- 
sent chapter will be called the Indeterminate Verb. 
Its opposite, the subject of the next chapter, will be 
called the Finite Verb. The meaning of the two 
words, and the value of the difiference of their import^ will 
be explained, or will explain itself, as we proceed. 

The leading distinction between the two is their rela^ 
tion to the Noun. 

We have seen that, from the accidents of their re- 
spective names, the Noun Substantive and the Noun 
Adjective, as Parts of Speech, have obtained a kind of 
prerogative over the Pronoun, which passes for less of 


a name tnan it really Ib. We shall now see that the 
Verb has established . something of the same kind as 
against the Noun. The Nomi is the Name. The Verb, 
however, is the word — par excellence. It may be this, 
and more than this ; but in the sense that is required 
for ordinary Grammar it is something less. 

Both Verbs and Nouns are inflected ; and there are, 
as already stated, two kinds of Inflection, viz.. Declen- 
sion and Conjugation. Nouns are declined. Verbs con- 
jugated. Nouns are generally declined ; rarely •conju- 
gated. Verbs are both conjugated and declined. One 
term, therefore, does not exclude the other. Nouns have 
Gender, Verbs have not. But Verbs have both Case and 
Number ; and, so far as they have this, are declined. 
On the other hand, they have Voice, Moods, and Tenses, 
which Nouns have not. Above all they have Persons. 
In this last inflection the distinction between the two 
Paits of Speech most especially lies. 

§ 297. Nouns are Declined, Verbs are both De- 
clined and Conjugated. 

The declension of verbs is a fact which should never 
be overlooked ; otherwise we run the risk of drawing a 
broader line between Verbs and Nouns than the struc- 
ture of language warrants. Without doubt the differ- 
ence is both important and striking, and the two classes 
are natural. This, however, is wholly insufficient to put 
them in anything like contrast to one another. Though 
the noun has no Moods and Tenses, it cannot be said 
that the verb has no Cases. More than this. If, on 
the strength of its decided verbal character, we connect 
the participle with the verb, the inflection of the verb 
gives us not only cases, but Genders as well ; for, 
although, in the present stage of our language, the par- 

• For Cof^ugated Substantives, see § 308, and note. 


ticiples are iminflected, in Anglo-Saxon their inflection 
was as fiill as it was in the Greek and Latin, and as it is 
in many modem languages. But without having re- 
course to the Participle, which is generally, though not 
consistently, treated as a separate part of speech, the 
Infinitive Mood, along with the Gerunds and Supines, 
where they exist, is, for most purposes, a Substantive. 
In Old High-German we have blasennea^flandi and 
others. We may call this a Gerund if we choose. We 
may also, if we choose, call to blaaenne a Supine; 
nevertheless, the result is a Noun in a Case. This is 
because the name of an action is an Abstract Noun. 
When we connect it with the idea of an agent we get 
something concrete. But this gives us Persons, or, at 
any rate, Agents. A horse may ruUj a man may rntn, a 
stream may run^ time may run {or fly). But if I wish 
to have the conception of running alone, I must sepa- 
rate, or draw off^ from the agent an action which is 
something which I can imagine, but which I cannot 
perceive through any of my senses. I can see a num 
in a atcLte of happineaa^ and I can see a horse in the act 
of running. Happiness^ however, without some happy 
object, or the act of running without some object that 
runs, I cannot perceive ; though I can imagine it. 
Nevertheless, both are Substantives ; one being the 
name of a Quality, the other that of an Action. 
In English we have such lines as 

7b err is human, to forgive divino — 
To l/e or not to be, that is the question — 

in which a substantive in the nominative case is repre- 
sented by a verb with a preposition before it. 2b err 
means error^ and to forgive means forgiveness. 
In Greek we find 

rh ^9ovu¥ — invidia 
rov ^ovu¥ ^invidia 
iy T^ ^orctirstn in9idid. 


This is because the name of any action may be used 
without any mention of the agent. Thus, we may speak 
of the simple fact of walking or moving, independently 
of any specification of the wdUcer or mover. When 
actions are spoken of thus indefinitely, the idea of 
person has no place in the conception ; from which it 
follows that the so-called infinitive mood must be at 
once Impersonal. But the ideas of relation in time 
and space have a place in it. We can think of a 
person bei/ag in the act of striking a blow, of his having 
been in the act of striking one, or of his bevng about 
to strike one; and in like manner, we can think of a 
person who is sleeping, is about to sleep, or who has 
slept In other words, can think of the act, or condition, 
of a striker, or a sleeper, as a simple act of strikmg, 
sleeping, as one alone in present, past, or future time ; 
and, when we think of it apart from the particular agent, 
we think of it simply as an act, state, or condition ; and 
of this act, state, or condition, the words strike and 
sleep are names, much in the same way that redness 
or strength are nam^ for the attribute suggested by 
red and strong. 

And as redm^s or strength can be Declined, so can 
strike, and sleep. In respect, then, to their Inflection, 
Verbs are (1) related to the Noun; and (2) character- 
ised by certain peculiarities of their own. 

§ 298. Special relations of the Tndetenninate Verb 
to the Noun. — So far as the Verb is related to the 
Noun it is Declined. So far as it is characterised by 
peculiarities of its own it is Conjugated. 

The relation of the IndetermincUe Verb to the Noun 
is twofold. 

With the Adjective it is related through the Parti- 
ciple ; concerning which no more need be said ; since 
the Participles are generally connected with the Verb, 



treated aa a part of it. Their Declension, how- 
, ia Adjectival. Both were fully declined in 

§ 299. The Verbals.— Tao9^ Substantives which 
stand in the Eame relation to the Verb as the Partici- 
ples stand on the side of the Adjectives are the Verb- 
als. These are (I) the name of the act, or state, itself, 
id (2) the name of the agent. The former ends in 
and may bo called the Verbal in -ing. The 
:ter ends in -er ; and may be called the Verbal in -er. 
They are correlative to one another. Hunting is the 
act of one who kiiiits. Hiinter is one who perfonns 
the act of kuntinff. The same is the case where, in- 
stead of an act, we have a state or condition. Sleep- 
ing is the act of one who sleeps ; i.e. of one who in thiB 
respect is a sleeper. 

§ 300. The old DeicUnsion of the Verb. — In the 
older st^es of our language there was a true Infinitive 
Mood which ended in -an, aa b<Eman=buTn, lufian 
^love. When this was preceded by to, -an became 
-&nne ; as to iujUm/ne = to love, to bcemeime = to 

This A. S. form in -nne has been noticed already ; 
but it will perplex no one who has gone through the 
elements of the Latin grammar, and knows what is 
meant by an Infinitive Alood or a Gerund. Such a 
reader will at once compare lujian = love with araare ; 
and b{vrnan=bum mth urere ; whilst to luJtenne=to 
love he will compare with ad amaTtdum; and to bcem- 
enn€=to burn with ad urendiim. 

Both the Qenmds and the Supines in Latin are d^ 
clined as Noune. 

The Latin, in words like amari and audlri, moneri 
aod retft, shows that the Indeterminate Verb may ap- 
proach the character of a Noim in both Voices; and the 



Greek, which uses such combinations as toO Tihrr8(rrah 
70V TV(f>67jvaif does the same. 

Here, then, we meet with an approach on the side 
of the Verb to the Noun, just as, in the Verbals, we 
met with an approach to the Noun on the side of the 

In the Infinitive Moods, the Gerunds, and the Supines 
we have the name of the action only — not the name of 
any agent. Hence, it is with the forms in -dng that 
these Infinitive forms are most especially compared: 
and the Noun is the Noun Substantive. 

§ 301. ^/nde^er^nriwate' arwi '-Fmite' cw 7iamc«. — 
In bH these forms the name of an agent is conspicuous 
for its absence — conspicuous for its absence whether the 
Verb convey the notion of an act or a state. The 
Verbs, then, are essentially Jmpersonal. As such they 
are Abstractions; but, as every act or state has some 
person or thing which makes it such, it is wholly in- 
definite, or indeterminate in this respect. 

Unfortunately, however, we have no recognised name 
for them, or the division to which they belong. * Ini- 
personal ' is used in another sense, though, theoretically, 
it is by far the best name ; inasmuch as the Verb of the 
other division, between which the whole class is divided, 
is characterised by having Persons. ^ Infinitive^ is 
used in too limited a sense. If it were not so, it would 
be the second-best name ; inasmuch as the opposite class 
is called ' Firdte.^ 

In comparing, and sometimes contrasting, these two 
classes, I call the second by its ordinary name, and 
call the former ^IndetermmateJ This will include not 
only the Infinitive Mood, but the Gerunds and Svr 
pines; or their equivalents. The two great points 
of contrast are the absence or presence of the name of 
(or something suggestive of the name of) the agent ; 


nd, connected with this, their respective relations to 
he Noun. 

§ 302., The form in -ing and the Present Parti'- 
dple. — The original Vowel of this Verbal Abstract was 
lot -i- but -^^• ; as in clcensung, hwiatlung. Its ob- 
ique case when governed by -on was in -e — on clcenS" 
inge, on hwistlunge, &c. ; afterwards Ordeansvag, a- 
ohiatling, &c. 

These in the present English both change the -^^• 
nd drop the final -e ; and deanaing and whistling are 
he result. 

When, besides this, the prefix a- drops off, the result 
3 1 was luhistli/ngj I was cleansing^ and the like. 

But this -^/ag is the sign of the Present Participle, 
rhich began with the termination "ud^ and ends in 
mg; as A. S. Ivfiandj now loving j &c., &c. 

This is Confluence on a large scale, for the change is 

More on this point will be said hereafter in ^Syntax* 



soN. — gabnett's THEOBT. 

§ 303. Whoever, after duly noticing that nothing 
as been said about the Pronoun as one of those 
ranches of the Noun with which the Intermediate 
erb is connected in the way of affinity, and then, after 
3nsidering such forms as amare, amarif amandi^ 
mando, aTnandnim, amatum, amatuj proceeds to the 
'onjugation of amOj amasj amat, &c., or amavi, ama- 
istii amavitj will not be long in perceiving that the 

s 2 


Finite Verbs are as essentially and characteristically 
Personal as the Verbs of the preceding chapter are the 
contrary. He will see, too, that in these last there is 
something that implies, though it does not directly 
convey, the name of an agent ; and he will see that, for 
the first two persons at least, that name must belong to 
the class of Pronouns. In amo, amas, &c., it mani- 
festly lies in the affixes -o and -as, &c. ; which, what- 
ever they may have been originally, are now part and 
parcel of the Latin Verb ; and when he translates these 
into English, and says / love, thou lovedst, the Prono- 
minal character of the combination becomes unmis- 

From this point of view he may add symmetry and 
harmony to the relations of the Verb with the Noun. 
For in -o (or its equivalent J) and in -ds (or its equiva- 
lent thou) he gets the name of the person who loves ; and, 
as he can speak of the agent for the third person as he, 
she, or it, he gets a name like hunt-^er (or the Verbal 
in -er), as that of the name of the Agent. Hence, as 
the Indeterminate Verb comes into connection with the 
Noun through one Verbal, the Personal comes into 
connection with it through the other ; the Substantive 
through the Verbal in -ioi^ ; and the Pronoun through 
its equivalent to the Verbal in -er — each in their re- 
spective ways — connected with the Verb and Noun, or 
vice versa. 

§ 304. Still, the nature of the connection is by no 
means similar. The Substantive and Participle are, as 
Parts of Speech, akin to the Verb ; and the Verb to 
them: and the act indicated by words like hunting, 
and the agency indicated by words like hunter, are cor- 
relative terms. But the Pronoun has no such elements 
of affinity. Such as it has it gets in its capacity of a 
substitute for a Substantive : and its connection with 


the Verb is simply that of one word in combination 
witti another. We infer this in compounds like ctTM-o, 
amrOSj &C. We see, and hear, it in combinations like 
I lovej you move. 

§ 305. How this can give us the three Persons of a 
Verb is not very difficult to see. 

The logician, or metaphysician, divides the whole 
universe under two heads — himself, the sentient 
being, and everything else beside — the ego and the 
rumrego. The classes in the way of magnitude are in- 
commensurable ; but they exhaust the whole world of 

The ordinarv talker makes a third class. There is 
(1) the speaker, (2) tlie person spoken to, and (3) the 
person, or thing, spoken about. He calls one / ; the 
other thou; the third he, she, or it. The first two ex- 
plain themselves. The third is explained by the con- 
text. Every object that hunts j or sleeps, or does any 
action, or suffers from an action done by aught else, 
or is in any state whatever, comes under one of these 
three denominations. Countless, then, as is the multi- 
tude of known and conceivable actions, each one with 
its agents, the whole incalculable host of the latter can 
be reduced to three classes. Everything that has or will 
be done, or is capable of being imagined as a deed, is 
done by a doer belonging to one of them ; and if each 
of them has a short and adaptable name, a coalition 
with the verb is a very natural result. 

When such a coalition lias taken place, the whole 
character of the verb is changed. It loses to a great 
extent its abstract and indefinite character. It becomes 
* invested with circiunstances ; ' for it is no longer the 
name of a bare action, but the name of an action plus 
that of the actor. 

To this condition, however. Verbs arrive ; and when 


they have done so there is a great tendency to sepa^ 
rate them from the noun ; for they have thus become 
personal ; and then the difference is a great one. 

§ 306. The Finite Verbs, then, are Personal ; and, 
as such, play a more conspicuous part in language than 
the Indeterminate. They do not, however, do this as 
simple, single-handed Verbs, but as Verbs with a super- 
added element. 

What this is has been suggested ; and it has long 
been admitted that it is a Personal Pronoun. Whether 
it is in the Nominative or in an Oblique case is a ques- 
tion of comparatively recent origin. It is chiefly with 
the name of the late Mr. Gramett, among whose nume- 
rous contributions to the higher departments of philo- 
logy the present doctrine stands, perhaps, the first in 
value, that it is most especially connected. Mr. Crar- 
nett, however, with his usual justice towards his prede- 
cessors, has indicated a suggestion of the famous Keltic 
scholar E. Lhuyd. 

The verb, according to Mr. Gramett (who henceforth 
will speak for himself), is not so much a finite verb as a 
verbal ; the pronoun which invests it with personality 
being not in the Nominative case, or in Concord with 
the verb, but in the Possessive case, while the verb 
itself is in a state of Begimen or Crovemment. 


* Grammarians have not been able to divest themselves of the idcA 
that the subject of the verb must necessarily be a nominative ; and 
when it was ascertained that the distinctive terminations of the verb 
are in fact personal pronouns, they persisted in regarding those pro- 
nouns as nominatives, abbreviated indeed from the fidler forms, but still 
performing the same functions.* 

'The personal terminations in Welsh are pronouns; but it is an 
important fact that they are evidently in statu reffiminis, not in apposi- 
tion or concord ; in other words, they are not nominatives, but oblique 
cases, precisely such as are affixed to various prepositions. For ex- 
ample, the second person plural does not end witii the nominative chtri, 
but with ichf tech, och, ych, which last three forms ore also found 


coalescing with tbHoiui prepositions, iioeh, " to you," $/noch, " in joa,** 
wrikyeh, " through yon.** 

* Now the roots of Weish yerbs are confessedly nonns, generally of 
abstract signification ; as, for example, dysff is both doctrinal and the 
second person imperatire doce, Dysg^oeh, or -tocA, is not, therefore, 
doeetia or docebitis vos; bnt doetrina tfestrum, "teaching of or by you." 
This leads to the important conclusion that a verb is nothing but a 
noun combined with an oblique case of a personal pronoun, virtually 
including in it a connecting preposition. This is what constitutes the 
real copula between the subject and the attribute. Doetrina ego is a 
logical absurdity ; but doetrina met, '* teaching of me," necessarily in^ 
dudes in it the proposition ego doceo, enunciated in a strictly logical 
and unequivocal form.' 

The following table improves the evidence on this 

^Vepaeiiional Forms, Verbal Forma, 

* I will love.* 

* thou wilt love.* 

* he will love.* 

* we will love.* 
'you will love.' 

* they will love.* 

* No one capable of divesting his mind of preconceived systems, who 
compares the Welsh prepositional forms with the verbal forms, will deny 
the absolute formal identity of the respective sets of endings, or refuse 
to admit that the exhibition of parallel phenomena of languages of all 
classes, and in all parts of the world, furnishes a strong primd facia 
ground for the belief of a general principle of analogy running through 
tM:'~PhUological Eaaaya, pp. 289-342. 

This is simply the truth. But the ^preconceived 
system ' is a very potent influence. An Englishman, 
who every day and hour is using, or making, such deri- 
vative forms as running and runnerj from any or 
every verb in the language, is slow to become familiar 
with the notion that the Verbal and Verb are very dif- 
ferent parts of speech, and that the Verb is not the older 
one of the two. That the two forms may be identical 
he can understand from words like a run, a swi/m^ a 

PrepoaiHonal Forma, 



• for me.* 



•for thee.* 



* for him.* 



* for us.* 



• for you.* 



* for them.* 

ear-ont or 'I 


leap, and others; but he is in the habit of looking 
upon so many others with the addition of -ing, or -er, 
as the better representatives of the class of Verbals ; 
and these he knows to be derivative. In languages 
where the derivational affixes are less conspicuous, the 
difficulty may be more easily abated. Where they are 
as numerous as they are in English, the adherence to 
preconceived system is more than usually natural. Be 
this, however, as it may, we have in the reduction of all 
the names of actual or possible agents to the three Per- 
sonal Pronouns one of the most beautiful, harmonious, 
and exhaustive contrivances that the instincts of Lan- 
guage have contrived. 

§ 307. It was no part of Gamett's theory to ask how 
far the Verb plv^ a Possessive rather than a simply 
Personal Pronoun, exd/uded the forms to which he op- 
posed them ; in other words, how far doo-es, as doctriiia 
7nei=zmy teaching excluded forms like / teach = ego 
doC'{eo). The two may have been concurrent, and he 
nowhere says that they were not. All he had to do 
was to consider the import of the Signs of Person, as 

Neither was it within his subject to ask whether tiv 
doces was doctrina mei rather than doctrina mea. 
The aim of his well-directed criticism was to show that 
the Personal endings were other than abbreviated No- 

§ 308. The preceding extract told what the writer 
meant with transparent lucidity. The induction, by 
which he fortifies his doctrine, is less capable of being 
given m eoctenso. It is enough to say that from the 
Fin class of languages he adduces the only missing link 
in the chain of his argument. Here, the pure and 
proper Subata/rUivea coalesce with the word that im- 
plies Possession; Le. take abbreviated forms of viy, 



ihyj &c., as affixes incorporated with the main word- 
just like the Post-positive Article in Scandinavian. 



filins mei 


— tui 


— ejus 


— noetri 


— Testri 


— eorum 








In the Iron or Ossete, a language of Caucasus, there 
is the same combination, except that the Pronoim jpr^ 
cedes the Substantive. 


pator raei 




— tui 




— ejus 




— nostri 




— vestri 




— eorum 



§ 309. That the Finite Verb is Finite because it is 
Personal, and for no other reason, is hard to show in an 
uninflected language like the English ; easy to show in 
an inflected language like the Greek. 

(a) The Indeterminate Verb has Voice — tutttbIvj 

(6) It has Tense — rvTrrfJi/, tstv^pcu, n/^^voi. 

(e, d) Thero is no reason why the Indetermioate Verb should not 
hare both (c) Number, and (d) Gender. The combination rh rvwrw 
mmverberartsaoet ofbeatmyt so far as the article ro is singular implies a 
single act Bat of such acts there may be more than one ; and, if ne- 
cessary, combinations like t& nnrrctr may express them. But they are 
not necessary, inasmuch as words like beating ^ from their abstract cha- 
racter, rarely require a plural form. There is, howerer, no known 
language in which the Indeterminate Verb has a siyn of Number. 

(e) There is no reason why the Indeterminate Verb should not have 
Gender§, In Greek it is preceded by the article rh. This in words like 
T^ rvrrclir, is a sign of the Substantival character of the verb rather 

* We may caU this, if we choose, a Cor^fugaHon of ike Subftandve, 

346 TEE FIlilTE YEEB. 

than a true sign of Gender. The Latin translation, however, of r^ 
^Ooytuf is invidiam which is feminine, and there is no impossibility in 
conceiving a language in which the Infinitive Moods, when preceded hf 
an article like 6, ^, rb, should take the gender of the corresponding sob- 
Btantive ; as & \4yuv. However, no language is known to do so. 

(/) Whether the Indeterminate has Mood is chiefly a question of 
words. That it is called a Verb in the Infinitive Mood is notorious. 
But this conveys the notion that it is a Mood ; rather than that it kat 
Moods. It has, however, in the Gerunds and Supines a great deal be- 
yond the purely Modal Infinitive ; and these, if it were necessaiy to 
enlarge on the question, could be shown to be mutaiis mutandis, in the 
same relation to the proper Infinitive, as the Imperative and Conjunc* 
tive to the Indicative. 

§ 310. It is not for nothing these apparently irre- 
levant observations upon what the Indeterminate Verb 
Tnight have, as opposed to what it really has, have been 
inserted. The object of the present criticism is to 
show that the limitation of the Finite Verb to the Per- 
son is the only characteristic which is not empirical. 
The reason for the class being natural is the fisu^t of the 
distinguishing characteristic lying in the nature of 
Language itself rather than in the forms which mere 
observation supplies. Number and even Gender are 
possible forms of the Indeterminate Verb as a single 
word. But Persons are not. Persons imply a second 
element ; i.e. the name of the Agent, and this involves 
a second name, from another Part of Speech, which the 
Indeterminate Verbs cannot supply when taken alone. 
In short, it takes us into questions of Combination and 

But here mixture begins. As soon as Number and 
Mood are assigned to the Finite Verb, the forms by 
which they are represented become mixed-up, combined, 
and complicated with, or involved in, those of Person ; 
and when this is the case the three must be considered 
together. Still, the other two are always subordinate 
to that of Person. 





§ 311. Mood and its signs. — It is only to a very 
small amount that the Finite Verb, in the present 
English, has Moods. 

There is a difference of Mood when we say ^if I 
were yo^ii in preference to saying ' if I was you^ We 
also say ^if I be the ^person you mean, I am ready to 
take the consequences.^ But be, here, is a different Verb, 
and, as such. Conjunctival on the strength of its own 
proper import as a word, rather than from anything it 
is as a Mood. 

When anyone says ' if he start soon he wUl be in 
time,^ the chances are that he takes some pains to do so, 
that he is talking grammarian's grammar, rather than 
the grammar of the world at large. Be this, however, 
as it may, the instance of start, instead of starts, merely 
tells us of the omission of the characteristics of the 
Indicative ; and is simply a Negation. 

ThiB negative sign of the Co^jonctive Mood is all that the present 
English can show. Bat (to repeat and re-repeat the old statement) the 
existing system of Inflections is only the fragment of an older one. In 
AngloBAZon the Flnial of the Indicative ended in -ab ; that of the 
ConjnnctiTe in -en — we, ye, or At l^/ia\> = we love, &c ; we, ye, or he 
It^fien^if—we lave, &c. Here the signs, on both sides, are positire as 
to Number and Mood, though not distinctive as to the Persons. In 
the Present English, however, as the affixes, on each side, are dropped, 
the result is that, for the Plural, the two forms (100 love, and if we 
hve) are confluent and identical. Between love and loves as the respec- 
tive signs of the two moods the difference is retained or ignored accord- 
ing to the speaker. The least that can be said in favour of the distinc- 
tion is that it is obsolescent 

§ 312. Signs of Number. — In the words am, 



speaJcest, and speaJceth or speaks, there are three differ- 
ent inflections, -7n, --est, and -^A, (or s). But they are 
signs of Person; and only signs of Number, so £ur as 
they are signs at all. For of Number the present 
English has no proper positive sign whatever, except 
in two verbs. 






we were 



Thou toast 

ye were 

Thou art 

ye are 


they were 


th^ are 

§ 313. In the present English the signs of Person 
are reduced to the -8^ in lovest, &c. ; and the -s in loves. 
Of these the former is obsolete or obsolescent ; the latter 
a secondary form from lov^eth. But the present system 
of Personal Inflection is one thing ; the history of the 
Signs of Person another. This is best collected from a 
series of examples. The following give the forms for 
the Present Tense Indicative ; those for the Singular in 
the first, those for the Plural in the second colimm. 
The Dual which is found in the Sanskrit, G-reek, and 
Moesogothic is omitted. 

Sanskrit 1. er^jami 

2. srijasi 

3. eryaH 





Greek. 1. x^ 

2. \^us 

3. \^i 



Latin. 1. lego 
2. UsgU 
8. legit 





Lithnanic. 1. euhu 
2. suH 
8. tuka 







Bohemian. 1. tooldm 

2. wolai 

3. wold 

woldme {eatt) 



Servian. 1. tshitam 

2. iehitash 

3. tshita 

tshUame {read) 



Illyrian. 1. vidim 

2. vidis 

3. vide 

videme {see) 



Moesogothic. 1. nasja 

2. nasjis 

3. fMsfi^ 

na^aima (heal) 



Old High Gennan. 1. prennu 

2. prennis 

3. prennit 

prennames (bum) 



Icelandic. 1. kalla 

2. kallar 

3. Aro^r 

koUum (eaU) 



Swedish. 1. kallar 

2. iEro^ar 

3. A:«/^r 


Danish. 1. kaller 

2. *a/fer 

3. kaUtr 

kalles (do) 



Old Saxon. 1. sok;u 

2. sokis 

3. «oi:u; 

soJ^a^ (seek) 



Westsaxon. 1. sece 
2. «ece«< 
8. seceth 

secath (seek) 



resent High German. ]. ?t«50 

2. /te^M 

3. ;»e6< 


Iteben (love) 



Dutch. 1. denke 

2. denkesi 

3. (2fnA:< 

denker (think) 





§ 314. To these we may add from the middle 
period of our own language the forms which we have 
already noticed for the three leading dialects. 


1. hope 

2. hopest 

3. hopeth 


Mercian (East). 


1. hope 

2. hopes 

3. hopes 


Do. (West). 


1. hope 

2. hopest 

3. hopeth 



1. hope (hopes) 

2. hopes 

3. hopes 


§ 315. This predominance of the single termination 
-8 in the Northumhrian, must be compared not only 
with that of -r in the Scandinavian group, but also, for 
reasons which will be given in the sequel, with the 
forms of the so-called Passive. 

Icelandic. 1. kattast kollunst Swedish. 1. kallas kaUas 
2. kattast kalliet 2. kaUas kaUers 

8. kattast katta 3. kaUas kattas 

Danish. 1. katt^ 

2. kattes 

3. kattes 


§ 316. A mere inspection of this table shows the 
fragmentary character of the Inflection of the present 
literary English. It begins with the forms of the 
Greek Verbs in -fu, and ends with such negations as 
I love (thou lovest), he loves, we, ye, they love. 

§ 317. In the -« of love^s-t, we still retain the old 
personal sign. But the -t is an extraneous addition ; and 
the whole form is obsolescent. In aU the other persons 


there has been either loss or change — absolute loss 
throughout the whole Plural ; and change (from -th to 
-^) in the Third Person Singular. But these are not 
the only processes. In the Old Saxon and the Anglo- 
saxon all the persons plural end like the second, i.e. 
in "th. Why? How? Has the second person ex- 
tended its sign to the other two ? Or has each of the 
other two undergone its own proper transformation ? 
Has the m of the first person, along with the -tU of the 
third, proprio motu^ and by. an independent process, 
become -th ? The German series lieben, liebet, lieben 
^amamus, amatis^ amant, favour the view. But 
the Norse -r, which represents an older -8, can scarcely 
be thus explained. Thirdly, in the Middle Mercian 
(or Midland) English the termination is -en. But this 
-071 in Westsaxon was the sign of the Conjimctive, rather 
than the Indicative, Mood. What is the nature of the 
change here ? Have so many -^ha become --ens ? Or 
have the Conjunctive forms bodily and in mass, dis- 
placed or replaced the Indicative? These are the 
questions which the history of the Persons suggests. 
It happens, however, that the thoroughly negative cha- 
racter of our present Inflection makes minute criticism 
unnecessary — ^at least, in a work of moderate size. In 
the wider field of a more general philology the details 
are of great importance. 




§ 318. The Tenses — how Tnany are there vn English f 
— If--^«F^look.. to Jih^ir i^^ig^ga^ we hftye^ two^!Sexmsu. 
If we look to their forms and history, we have three. 
Thus — between the meaning of forms like Un;edj or 
bent, and forms like spoke, or swum, there is no differ- 
ence in respect to the time to which the action is 
assigned. It is an action of Past time as opposed to 
Present {love, bend, speak, swim). But of Past time 
there are two sorts, e.g. I loved, I bent, I spoke, I 
swum as opposed to / have loved, I have beni^ I have 
spoken, I have swum. Indeed, if we add combina- 
tions like / had loved, and / shall have lovedj I was 
hvi/ag, we raise the varieties of past time to five. The 
last three, however, are not Tenses, in the proper sense 
of the word. They are not modifications of any single 
word. Neither do they belong to the domain of Ety- 
mology ; but, on the contrary, to that of Syntax. This 
is because they are combinations of two, or more, sepa- 
rate words which convey the same import as that con- 
veyed by a tense ; and, so doing, are substitutes for a 
tense rather than the tense itself. In Greek and Latin, 
where we have single words like eypaypu, ryiypaifM, 
B^erfpat^Hv, and scripsi, scripsero, scribebaTn, we have 
the exact converse ; viz. single words as true Tenses, 
conveying the sense which, in English, is conveyed 
by a combination of separate ones. This means that 
for certain modifications of time there are two concur- 
rent modes of expression; and the more clearly we 
understand the difference between them the more ra- 
tional will be our grammar. 


§ 319. The Tenses of the Present English as de- 
termined by their form and history are Three : (1 ) the 
Present ; (2) the Perfect ; and (3) the Preterit. 

The Pl'esent has no special sign; the Perfect is 
formed by a change of Vowel ; tjie Preterit by the ad- 
d^ion^-i2, -^or resoL. Of the Present, as its charac- 
teristics are wholly negative, no further notice need be 
taken. In respect to its Persons, over and above the 
obsolete or obsolescent Second Singular in -est, it re- 
tains the Third {loves or loveth) — only, however, in the 
Singular Number and in the Indicative Mood. For 
the Plural and the Conjunctive we have only the 
neggtive form love throughout. 

§ 320. The Moesogothic, and the Moesogothic 
alone, tells us, with unmistakeable clearness, the true 
nature of the forms like spoke, swum, and others — 
forms which are made by changing the vowel rather 
than by the addition of either a single soimd or a 
syllable — ^forms which for this reason have, somewhat' 
&ncifully, been called Strong, or self-sufficing, as op- 
posed to forms like loved, &c., where the super-added 
-d! is a sign of Weakness, or dependence upon extrane- 
ous elements. 

§ 321. These forms the Moesogothic gives us in 
two divisions ; one of which differs in detail only from 
the English, giving simply a change of vowel. The 
other (and in this lies its importance) gives us forms 
like cucwrri or momordi in Latin, and rirtHf^ 
or yiyptufHi in Oreek. In six out of the twelve 
classes over which the Moesogothic Perfects are distri- 
buted, this reduplication of the initial consonant pre- 
sents itself; and, in the last two, there is a change of 
vowel as welL 

A A 






s&i'Salt (spring) 


hdi'hait (call) 


hldi-M&up (leap) 


s&i-zUp (sleep) 


Idi'lo (laugh) 


gdUgrot (weep) 

In atdi^tautj from 8tauian=iwe have a reduplication 
of both the initial consonants ; and we have the same 
when the verb begins with either ah- or sp-. In hldi- 
Idupj too, so far as the h is consonantal there is a similar 
reduplication. Elsewhere, however, it is only the first 
consonant that is doubled, e.g. sdir-zlep, gai^rdt. 
Herein the M. G. is nearer the Latin than the G-reek ; 
for the Latin gives us such forms as epo^ondi* 

§ 322. But the point of the most importance where- 
in the M. G. agrees with the Latin is the difference 
of the treatment at the hands of grammarians between 
the Tenses like mo-mordij cvHyu/rri^ and apospondij 
which are formed by reduplication, and the Tenses like 
acrip-^, and ama-vij which are formed by a syllabic 

In Greek, words like yiypcuf)a, Sypay^ have always 
been treated as Verbs alike in respect to their Conju- 
gation ; as Verbs equally normal, and equally reducible 
to rule ; and above all, as Verbs which had two Tenses 
for the two varieties of Past time ; each with its appro- 
priate function, each with its characteristic formative, 
and each with its recognised name. The Tense formed 
by reduplication, and the Tense which implied a con- 
nection between the time of the action and the time 
of its being spoken about, was called the Perfect ; the 
Tense in which no such connection was implied, and 
which was formed by the addition of -«, was called the 
Aorist ; and each, so long as the two were formed in 
the manner just noticed, was kept separate and distinct 


from the other, even as both were kept separate and 
distinct from the Present and Future of the same Mood, 
Voice, and Conjugation. This means that from the 
difference of form nothing beyond the simple single 
difference of Tense was inferred; one form being just 
as regular, and just as representative, as the other. 

This is what we find in Greek. But it is not what we 
find in English ; indeed, if it were not for the Mceso- 
gothic, the origin and history of the English Perfect 
would be a matter of very imcertain speculation. No 
wonder, then, that in England imtil the study of the 
Moesogothic became a recognized department of Eng- 
lish Philology, the verbs like spoke,, &c. — ^the verbs 
which represented the old Beduplicates — were simply 
treated as Irregular. 

In Latin, however, there was, so far as the forms 
went, nothing to disguise the identity of words like 
mo-w^ordi with words like Thv^M, and of words like 
scrijhsi with words like eypay^ Nevertheless, the 
Latin G-rammar represents them as something very dif- 
ferent. Of the Greek tenses, the Perfect and the Aorist, 
the Latin recognises only one ; the result of this being 
that TTUHmordi and acripsi, &c., &c., instead of being 
referred to two different Tenses of the same Conjuga- 
tion, were referred to the same Tense, with a difference 
of a very vague character — the difference between this 
or that Conjugation ; the difference between this or that 
kind of Verb ; and, above all, the difference concerning 
which we have heard more than enough in England ; 
viz. the difference between what is called Eegularity 
and Lrregularily. 

§ 323. Far s change in the l&ngnage of grammarians of this kind 
there most be reasons. And they are not &r to seek. 

(1) The Latin had neither the word Aoritt nor any adequate eqiiiTa* 
lent to it. 

▲ ▲a 


(2) The Latin, in a great number of instances, dropped the Bedn- 
plication where the Greek retained it. For one word in Greek which 
giyes nB such a form as rv^ or ypa^ from ri'Twpa or y4-ypa^ 
the Latin gives ns scores like/e«, fugij and others, from fe-fec-i, fu-fugi, 
and the like. 

(3) The Latin had, besides the forms like ftd and serip-ai, a third ; 
that of words like ama-vi, audi-vi, mon-n-4, terminations which give 
a third affix with only two kinds of Time to match. The result of this 
is that the precision and definitude which resulted from two well- 
marked forms in Greek, and two well*recognized differences of import, 
was greatly diminished; so that momordi, scripait and amavit &c, 
migh\ mean either / have bitten, or I bit; I have written, or I wrote; 
1 have loved, or / loved, as the case might be. 

(4) Concurrently with this (until we can determine which is which) 
in the way of Action and Beaction, the distinct character between the 
two kinds of Fast Time became less and less ; and all the three Latin 
forms had but one out of two meanings. Sometimes it was / have loved, 
and the like ; sometimes it was / loved, and the like. 

(6) But there was a fifth influence ; whether in the way of a cause 
or an' effect we need not here enquire. The form of Past Time which 
the Greek expressed by words like rirv^ changed; and combi* 
nations of the verb denoting possession with the Passive Participle came 
in to encroach upon the function of the Old Perfect, i.e. / have beaten 
^rirv^ With this we are thoroughly faTni1iy.r in English; the 
result being that the Old Greek Perfect was merged, in respect to import, 
with the Aorist. Some, however, of the Perfect forms remained; 
but as they sunk their distinctive meaning, and dropped their re- 
duplication, ihey are, at .present, but few in any modem languagec 
Still the forms like spoke and swum, &c., represent them« 

(6) The result of this is that, in the end, one of the two forms ex- 
cludes the other. In Latin there are a few verbs for which we find both 
XAHBOB—^ango—pepiffi—panxi. But the number decreases, and the 
rule is that it is always the reduplicate form that gives way. 

§ 324. If we put all this together, we not only see 
that the treatment as a Tense of the Beduplicate Per- 
fect has varied with the language, but, also, that the 
class to which such Perfects belong — disguised as they 
are, and fragmentary as is the class itself — ^is a natural 

(a) Few or none of the so-called Strong Verbs are 
of foreign origin. Hence new words introduced into 


our language always have their past tense Preterit — 
never Perfect. 

(b) This means that, as an Inflection, the change 
of vowel is Obsolete. 

(c) The change is all one way, i.e. words like spokey 
&c., may take the form of words like loved ; but not 
vice versa. 

(d) The words which are SU^ong in one of the 
German languages or dialects are generally so in the 

Tota ill* qnaatacnnqne Anomalia, Verba exotica vix omnino attin- 
git ted iUa sola qiUB Nativa sunt — exotica vero ilia appello qiue a La- 
tinii, GaUicis, ItalidB, Hifipanicis, aut etiam Cambro-Britannids dedox- 
iffliiB, qiUB qaidem multa sunt : Katira vero ilia voco quse ab antiqua 
lingua Tflotoniea, seu Saxonica, originem ducunt, que quidem omnia 
mnt ICoiKwyllaba (aut saltern a MonosjUabis deducta), et plerumque 
nobifl emn Germams, Danisi eto., communia sunt (levi saltern immn- 
tatione fscta) : qnoniam nempe sive Linguae sivo Dialectus ejusdem cum 
. Anglifuna sunt originis. — WaUis, 

(e) Derived words are weak rather than strong. 
The intransitive forms drink and lie are strong ; the 
traiLsitives drench and lay are weak. 

It is clear that the natural character of these so- 
ealled Irregular or anomalous words was, partially, seen 
by the older scholars ; and not only by Wallis, but by 
Ben Jonson. So far as the latter allowed himself to 
speak irreverently of either of the two classes, it was 
the form in -<2 for which he shows the least respect ; 
and, when he calls it ' a common inn to lodge every 
strange and foreign guest,' he uses a metaphor which 
shows that he clearly saw. the extent to which one pro- 
cess was operative, the other obsolete. To this, how- 
ever,^ he assigns ^ none but natural and homebom 
words, which, though in number they may not bo 
many, a hundred and twenty or thereabouts, yet in va- 
riation are so divers and imcertain that they need much 


the stamp of some good logic to beat them into pro- 

Hickes, after giving a single conjugation for the 
Anglo-Saxon verbs, throws the rest into a single class, 
with the remark, however, that they follow a principle 
of their own, along with the additional suggestion 
foraa/n, magia proprie secundam conjugatioTi&rifi con- 
stUuere videantur quam inter cmomalia recenaeri. 

§ 325. Of this doctrine of a second Conjugation it 
may be said, at once, that it is immeasurably better than 
the older doctrine of Anomaly or Irregularity. But 
there is a great deal in the doctrine of a second CJonju- 
gation which, without appearing on the surface, com- 
plicates the grammatical expression of the difference. 
If spoke and loved are verbs in different conjugations, 
they are verbs in the same Tense ; for it is, manifestly, 
to escape the assignment of them to different Tenses, 
that the second Conjugation is resorted to. If, on 
the other hand, they are verbs of different Tenses, a 
second Conjugation is supertiuous ; and, perhaps, in- 

They are, certainly, so when we look at the Greek 
language; treating vowels like spoke as words like 
rkrvifxij and words like loved as words like lypayfra — 
Tense for Tense. Here, there are no pretensions to 
a second Conjugation, whilst there is no doubt as to 
the reality of a second Tense. And it must be added 
that, in the opinion of the present writer, the Greek 
rather than the Latin is the language to which we 
must look. Between the Moesogothic and the Latin, 
we get the evidence of an original reduplication, and, 
with it, in many cases, a change of vowel. We get the 
loss of that reduplication, and the retention of the mo- 
dified vowel. We get, too, the loss of the distinction 
of import which in Greek we find by mere inspection. 


Lastly, we get the gradual exclusion of reduplicate 
forms with a Perfect sense, and the fusion of the two 
into a single Tense — provided, always, that we take the 
sense of the inflection rather than its form as the cri- 
terion of its nature, and the character by which we 
determine its name. 

But the conflict between the claims of these two 
elements to constitute a Tense is a very serious ques- 
tion ; and one which is far too complicated to be given 
here, in detail. If the meaning is to determine it, 
loved and spoke, momordi and scripsi are identical 
Tenses, and even such combinations as / have written, 
are as good Tenses as yiyfui^xi, &c. I am not prepared 
to say that, in many cases, they are not. In another 
part of my work I shall show that the doctrine that a 
given form must not always be what it was in its 
origin, and that words, as an old grammarian expresses 
it, migrate from one Part of Speech to another, is a sound 
one. Nor do I ignore the vast amount of innovation that 
is involved in such a language as the Latin, by making 
a fresh Tense, for forms like momordi, &c., when sepa- 
rated from forms like scripsi and amavi, &c. — to 
which much more may be added. On the other hand, 
when we have to account for such changes as those of 
the -eo- in speak, into that of the -o- in spoke, we must 
use the lights that we get from the Moesogothic, the 
Latin, and the Greek ; and if all these, form for form, 
lead up to the Greek rirv^a, and yiypa<f>a, the conclusion 
must be accepted — at least, in a work which professes 
to get at the import and origin of our Inflections his- 

This is as much as can be said upon this question at 
present. The little that can be added will be found in 
the ' Syntax.^ 

§ 326. The last point to be considered is the extent 


to which these disguised Beduplicate Perfects, even in 
a language like the English, where they are found only 
as the fragments of an older and fuller system, are still 
susceptible of order aud arrangement. And this will 
be done briefly. The earlier classifications may be 
found in Grimm's great Comparative Grammar of the 
languages of the German family, and Bask's Anglo- 
saxon Grammar. In the recent works of Professor 
March and Dr. Morris, this is taken as a ground-work, 
but with the necessary modifications, and mth special 
reference to the Anglosaxon. What follows here is 
written more to show that there is a method in the 
ar!irangement, than to exhaust the details of it. 

§ 327. The Vowel may be changed once and once 
only ; or it may be changed oftener than once. Some- 
times it is changed in the Perfect only ; sometimes in 
the Participle as well ; sometimes in the Perfect itself 
according to the Number and the Person ; and some- 
times in the Present; e.g. in A.S. bldwe, bleow, 
gebldwen; awimme, swam, avmmman, 8wummen= 
(/) blow, bleWf {we) blew, blown; (/) swimj swam; 
{we^ swam {swum), swum. Sometimes, as will soon 
be seen, it changes with the Person, in the Present 
Tense itself. 

§ 328. Vowel Long. 

(1) Change from o or a to e. The Vowel of the 
Past Participle the same as that of the Present : blow, 
crotv, grow, know, throw, d/raw, fly, slay — blew, crew, 
gretv, knew, thr&iv, drew, flew, slew— blown, crown, 
&c., slain. 

(2) The long Vowel sound (spelt ea) followed by 
2, r (liquids), k (a palatal mute), or v. Change to 
o. The Vowel of the Past Participle the same as that 
of the Perfect steal, bear, swear, tear, wear, breakf 



Bpeakj weave — stole^ bore^ swore^ Sec. — stolenj bom, 
mvom, &c. 

(3) The vowel Long ; the consonant that follows a 
Sibilant— freeze, choose— froze, choae— frozen, chosen. 

This is the division wherein the vowel of the Pr&' 
sent changes ; the A. S. conjugation being as follows : — 


2nd Per. 


Perfect S. 

Perfect P. 
















































See Marchf ^ 

§S 199, 206. 

(4) Vowel Long — spelt with a single letter, and 
followed by a mute. Change from a to u (spelt -oo^). 
Vowel in the Participle the same as in the Present— 
shake, take, wake, (JoT^sake-^shook, took, woke, {for- 
sook) — shaken, taken, waken, (Jor)saken. 

(5) Vowel Long — spelt with the letter i ; but, in 
sound, a diphthong. Changed into o in the Perfect, 
in the Participle into t (the i in pit). The vowel of 
the Participle that of the Present, rather than the 




































Here, in Anglosaxon, the vowel was changed in the 
Plural, with which the Participle agreed. In both 
cases, however, it seems to have been long; or, at any 
rate, the consonant is not doubled. 






\st Pere. 

2nd Pere. 

Jl UffliM^|MO« 





















§ 329. Vowd Short. 

Followed by m, n, ng, or nk. Change to a for the Per- 
fect in the Singular, to u for it in the Plural number. 
The vowel of the Participle that of the Plural of the 


Perfect Sing. 

A, S, Plural. 




























Iflung-on) ' 






































In the following words the i and ou, now diph- 
thongs, represent the short sounds of i in pin and the 
u in full. Like swim^ &c., they had a and u in the 
Plural. The Scotch retains both the short vowel and 


the double form, the Perfect being regularly in a, the 
Participle in u — as band, fand, grand, wand ; bund, 
fund, grund, wuvd. 
















The loss of the syllabic inflections -an, and -e, &c., for 
the Infinitive Mood and the Present Tense, by shorten- 
ing the word, would encourage the lengthening of the 
vowel ; for iafind-a/n, grvndHva, &c., the i was doubt- 
less sounded as in swim. So it would be in dvmb'-an, 
of which the Perfect was cUymh or damb in the Singu- 
lar, and cluTrdy-on in the Plural ; the Participle being 

§ 330. RedupUcaMon retained. — Did. — This 
word, in the current English of the present time, 
stands alone ; the solitary instance of the old redupli- 
cation after the manner of ri-TvJM. The Anglosaxon 
form was di^. Old Saxon d'e-da ; in which case it is 
the first of the two cTs which gives us the sign of 
tense, and the last of them the one that belongs to the 

§ 331. Eight, — There is another word in the same 
condition as di-d, i.e. another word wherein the redupli- 
cation is preserved. Here the g is out of place ; the 
better spelling being hiht, in Anglosaxon Mkt, Moeso- 
gothic hdi-hdit. Higkt, however, scarcely belongs to 
the current language ; being obsolete, or obsolescent. 

An ancient fabric laised tx> infonn tho sight, 
There stood of yore, and Barbican it hight, 

Drjden, Mao FUcknoe. 

§ 332. Did was the first word that was claimed as 


reduplicate Perfect. Eight was the second. This was 
on the strength of the older forms Mkb in A. S., and 
hdihdit in M. G. Still, hight is only a reduplicate 
tense to the eye ; for if it were spelt as it is pronounced 
{kite), it would show no signs of doubling whatever. 

Held has since been added to the list, the 0. H. Gr. 
form being heioM, or hialt, the M. Gr. hdihcdd. 

§ 333. Eight and hdd begin with the sound of A, 
and as A is a breathing rather than a true articulate 
consonant, it is by no means a very stable element in 
any word ; especially when it stands between two 
vowels. It has evidently done so in both hight and 

Such being the case, it is manifest that, in the pre- 
sent forms, it is the consonant of the fundamental verb 
that is lost ; and that of the reduplication which is re- 

Whether there are other words of this kind — ^words 
in which the radical consonant is lost, and nothing 
left behind but the prefix — is a point of some import- 

It by no means follows that, because an exceptional 
sound like that of A, in an exceptional position between 
two vowels, can be dropped, other consonants can be 
dropped also. On the other hand, there are fisicts which 
connect, or seem to connect, the change of vowel with 
the elimination of the middle consonant ; in which case, 
when the vowel of the root and the vowel of the redupli- 
cation come together, a third sound is the result. The 
Greek gives us nothing that encoiurages this idea ; for in 
words like XiXoiTra, irhroiOoy &c., we have the changed 
vowel and the reduplicate syllable together. But in 
Latin, with words like fUgi, fed, &c., from filgio, fdcio, 
the lengthening of the vowel is reasonably referred to the 
elimination of the second f in fu-fug-i, and firfio4^ 


&c. I find it difficult to ascertain how far in the 
opinion of the two writers who have paid most atten- 
tion to the question — ^Professor March and Dr. Morris 
— ^this elimination of the radical consonant extends. Is 
it limited to words like higkt, or extended to words 
like sprang ? 

§ 334. The Preterit— The Preterit is formed from 
the theme (it matters little whether we call it Present 
Tense, Infinitive Mood, or Eoot), by the addition of 
-ed, -d, or "t. 

When the theme itself ends in -d or -t, an -6 is in- 
serted, which prevents the contact of identical conso- 
nants — TneTid, Tnendred, &c. 

When the theme ends in a Surd consonant, the affix 
is -4 — stq>, slept (so sounded, though spelt stepped). 

When the theme ends in anything but an identical 
letter, or a Surd, the affix is --d—move, moved. 

(a) These are the real rales of the present language. They are the 
real rules, because when we spell stept as stepped, we have a matter of 
wpdUng — not one of speaking : and it is Speech, not Writing, which 
makes Language. 

{b) They are the rules of the present language ; because if wo pro- 
nounce the final -ed in words like blessed^ we pronounce them after an 
archaic, or obsolete, manner — a manner kept up, as in the reading of 
the Scriptures, for adequate reasons, but still not the manner of common 
conrerBation at the present time. 

The general rules for the use of -ed, -^, or -<i, are, 
mutatis mutandis,, simply those of the -e8, -8, and -z 
of the Possessive Case and Plural Number of the Sub- 

§ 335. There are three natural groups among 
which the exceptions to this general rule may be dis- 

(1) Verbs wherein the final sound of the tlieme 
(-d or -^) is identical with the initial sound of the 
affix — as bendj cutj &c. The principle of this is a 


tendency to avoid the addition of the eoctra syllable, 

(a) The last sound of the theme -d--- 

a. This is done by shortening the vowel when it is 
long ; and it gives us bled, bred, fed, led, redd, sped, 
met, from bleed, breed, feed, &c. 

^. By ejecting the -e, when the -cZ is preceded by I, 
n, or r {liquida), and changing the -d into -t. This 
gives us bent, buUt, girt, lent, rent, sent, sperU, &c<, 
from bend, buUd, gird, lend, &c. 

7. By the negative process of making no change 
at all — as in rid, shed, spread, from rid, slied, 

(6) The last sound of the theme -t — Here the 
negative process repeats itself. 

a. Vowel short — burst, cast, cost, cut, hit, hurt, let, 
put, sit, shut, slit, split, thrust ; all the same form as 
their respective Presents. 

fi. Vowel long — ^Preterit beat, Present beai. 

§ 336. (2) Verbs whereof the Vowel is changed, 
— ^When preceded by a Liquid, t takes place of d. In 
this case the vowel of the Preterit is always short — 
not only in words like smdt and burnt from smell and 
bum, where it is short in the Present, but also in 
words like meant and felt from mean and feel where it 
is long. 

In bereft, cleft, kept, left, Idst, slept, swept, wepU 
from bereave, cleave, &c^ the consonant is other than a 
Liquid : and the vowel is changed — only, however, in 
respect to its Quantity. 

In told and sold from tell and sell the vowel is 
changed in respect to its Quality, Here the consonant 
that follows is a Liquid. The A. S. forms were teUe, 
tealde ; seUe, sealde. 

§ 337. (3) Verbs whereof the Consonant is changed. 


—In all these the Consonant is either k or g, or one of 
the allied sounds. The liability of these to change has 
been shown in the chapter on Phonesis, and to the 
Phonetic rules there indicated all the changes that 
belong to this division are referable. 

These Palatals may — 

(a) Pass into the soimd of y. The Anglosaxon 
forms of lay and aay were — 

Present, Preterit Participle, 

Lecge lagde ge-lagd 

Secge eagde ge-sagd 

Lay laid laid (prononnoed lade) 

Say said said (pronounced sed) 

(&) Also into that of A, originally a guttural y. 

Present, Preterit, Participle, 

Sece sohte ge-soJU 

Seek sought sought 

(o) Also into that of ng. 

Present, Preterit, Participle* 

AngloMZon Brings hrohte gs-hroht 

Modem T^g^'«^ Bring brought brought 

((2) Also into that of ngh 

Infinitive Preterit, Participle, 

udoeazon / ^^'^^ ^^ ge']>6ht « think 

^ X^inean ifuhte ge')^uhtoaeem 

Compare the German Ich denkessl thi/nJc; mich 
dunkt = meseema. 

(e) Also into that of tsh. 

Present, Preterit, Pdrticiple. 

Anglosaxon Toes tahte ge-tetht 

Hodem Engliah Teach taught taught 

Here the Preterit is like that of the preceding 


instances. The PreaerUj however, is changed : the h 
becoming tsh. 

Catchy caught^ caught does not occur in the oldest TSngliiih. In Layi- 
mon we find cacche^ cahte^ odht, Thia verb has oonfozmed to the I^ 
Tense of teach, &c. — ^Morris, Historical Outlines, &c, p. 171. 

Buy. In A. S. bycge, bohte, ge^okt. 

Fiw*. In Ac. wyrce—1 work : w<)rh4ess I worked; 
ge-worktss worked. In addition to the change in the 
consonant, r is transposed. Beseech. — The main Verb 
is 8eo^=I seek. In English be^eech^ be-sougkt. The 
simple Verb seek preserves the k. The compound 
changes it after the manner of teachy &c. 

The Participles. 

§ 338. The forms im, -mig and -ed. 

In form, the Present Participle is the most r^;ular 
Inflection in the language. Its sign is -^71^, which 
may be added, without alteration, to every verb which 
has a Present Participle at all — which the words i^, 
waSy shalii and a few others have not. 

TliJs is very simple and regular. The question, 
however, whether the result of this addition of '4ng be 
a Participle or a Verbal Abstract is a perplexing one. 
Something has been said about it in § 302, and more 
will be said in the Syntax. 

§ 339. The Preterit form, or that in -«c?, is nearly 
as regular as that in -ing. Not so that of — 

§ 340, The Perfect Participle. — This is connected 
with the class of verbs like spoke, swam, &c., where the 
past tense is formed by the change of vowel ; and 
not by the addition of -edy -d, or -t. As Perfect 
Tenses these were less simple and uniform than the 
Preterits : and their Participles are the same. 


The chief points connected with the Participle 
that are not involved in the history of the Perfect 
are — • 

a. Orrdsaion of the JiTial -n or -en. — Sometimes 
this is wholly obsolete ; as in avmm^ found, run, &c. 
Sometimes it is obsolescent, or archaic; as ahapen, 
graven, gotten, bidden, trodden, &c. Sometimes both 
fotms are equally cunent, but with a difference of 
meaning ; as drunk and drunken, bound and bounden; 
he had d/ruTik too much ; a drunken man ; we are 
bound to doit; it is our bounden duty. The e in 
borne is a mere artificial expedient for indicating a 
difference of this kind — bom=natu8, boi^ne^latua in 

6. When the -n, or -en, is thus dropped, the differ- 
ence between the Participle and the Perfect is reduced ; 
and, when the vowel of the two forms is the same, it is 
entirely abolished ; in other words the two forms be- 
come confluent. 

c. When the Tense changes from Strong to Weak, 
the Participle changes also ; though not necessarily at 
the same time. The Participle, as a riUe, retains its 
strong form the longest. 



















d. In A. S. the syllable -ge- was prefixed to both 
the Perfect and Preterit Participles ; as ge^oreni, 
ge^ufod^ borne, loved. The Northumbrian dialects 
were the first to drop it; the Westsaxon the most 
steady in retaining it. On the Continent it is dropped 
in the Scandinavian dialects ; retained in the Dutch and 

B B 


German. It is the y- in the archaic form yclept =icaUed 
or named, from A. S. clepian^caU or name. 

e. Sodden. Two words ending in th in A. S. 
changed it, in the Participle, into d. 

Cwethe cwath ge-ctoeden 

Seothe stdth ge-^oden 

f. Seothe changed its vowel in the Plural of the 
Perfect, belonging to the same class as choose, freeze, 
and lose. 

In writhe the th was retained. 

Present Perfect S. Perfect PI. Participle. 

Writhe tordth writhon writhen 

See list in March ; Grammar, &c., p. 104. 

g. In scathe the consonant was changed in the 
Tense but retained in the Participle. A. S. sceathe, 
sceod, sceodon, sceathen. 



§ 341. Perfects may become invested with the 
power of Presents. In Greek we see this in words 
like olha = / have experienced or learned which = / 
know. In Latin Tnemvni = / have called to mind = / 

§ 342. Can, shall, and Tnay are the most notable 
words of this class. So far as form and origin go, they 
are Perfects after the manner of olBa and memini. 
But they are also the bases of such Preterits as could, 
should, and migkL 

^ SHALL '-^^ can' — ^MAVy BTC. 371 

§ 343. Shall. — ^Existing forma — shcUty should (the 
Preterit), {shouldesty shouldat). Older form akaU^ 
The M. G. sign of the Second PergoQ was akal-U 

§ 344. Caai. — The M. G. form of the Second Person 
was kan^t. Existing forms — could (the Preterit); {couldr- 
eat or couldsf) — hen^kaow (the actual, or approximate^ 
radical of con=:leamy8tudy) ; as to con a task — cunning 
=knoiving, crafty {'knowledge is power'). The -i-, 
inserted in the spelling, after the false analogy of should 
and could^ does its best to disguise its true origin ; the 
result being one of the worst spelt words in the lan-> 
guage. The A. S. Preterit was cuj^e — Participle cup ; 
whence un-couth^^unknovm. 

§ 345. May. — M. G. Second Person mag-t — ^Pre- 
sent forms {Tnayest) — might (the Preterit) — (jnightesty 
viightst). In A. S. the Second Person was meaht ; the 
Preterit meaJUe. 

§ 346. Ought. — Present form (oughtest) ; Partici- 
ple cne^= possessed; A. S. agen. The A. S. Perfect 
ah ; in the Second Person age, with ahte as a regular 
Preterit. In M. G. dih; Second Person aiht; Pre- 
terit dihta. 

§ 347. Dare, Must, and Wot — These three words 
agree in having the sound of -8- which is not found (in 
English at least) in the fundamental word. 

(a) In dare we get a little help from the Greek 
forms 0(ippuv and Oapaelv : supposing that, sound for 
sound, and letter for letter, we identify the Sigma with 
the -«- in durst. This reappears in the — 




1. daiB 


2. dart 


8. dan 


B B 2 


^JDABE^ — 'must' — ^ WOT.' 

1. daursta 

2. daiirstes 

3. daursta 






Here the -8- of the first person in M. Gr. gives us 
the only -8 that can be compared with that of the 
Greek dapaelv^ the s- of the A. S. Second Person, &c., 
an -8 that is certainly extra-radical. 

In the present English, mutatis mutandis^ dare 
may be compared with owe; and durst with ought. 
Dare, like owe, as an independent Verb, has a full in- 
flection — dare, darvng, dared ; and, as such, is both 
Transitive and Intransitive — I dare {challenge) to do 
it — / dare not venture. For the Intransitive dare, we 
may substitute durst ; but not for the Transitive. 

(6) Must, in the present English, has only one 


1. m6t 


2. in68t 


3. jn6t 



Sing. in6sta 
Plttr, jn68tedtim 


(c) Wo 


Sing. 1. vait • 
2. Taist 


3. vait 


Plur. 1. vitam 


THE -D IN ^LOVED* 373 




wiate A. S. 



Pres. Part, 


Pose. Part. 


§ 348. The non- radical -8- in these three words has 
to be accounted for. The current doctrine is that, to 
the main verb ending in -^-, the weak inflection -t is 
added, and that, thus, when two ^ are brought into 
contact, the first is changed into -«. What, and how 
many, are the forms that justify this view? There 
are English verbs which end in -^, like put^ hit^ bite, 
and others ; and some of them take the afl&x -te. But 
none of them give such results as lest, ptiat, apist^ or 
the like, from let, put, or spit. This is what we find 
in English ; where the number is suflSciently limited to 
allow us to make a negative statement. What we may 
find elsewhere is another question. But the only two 
words I have found anywhere are the two under notice 
— these and no more. 

§ 349. Questions concemmg the Perfect and Pre- 
terit. — On the structure of the Perfect just as mucli 
has hitherto been written as serves to show how forms 
like spoke and siuam, &c., originated in Tenses like 
rsrvKfja and yiypa(f>a, etc., and how, when denuded of 
their reduplication, and otherwise disguised, they lost 
their character as separate, independent, and regular 
Perfects. The minor points connected with either 
their formation or decay were not investigated. There 
is something, however, to be said about them; and, 
as one of them is connected with the history of the 
Preterit, it is convenient to consider the two Tenses 

§ 350. Origin of tlie -d in loved, &c. — For the 
origin of the sign of the Preterit — the affix -ed, -d, or 


"t — as for the origin of the sign of the Perfect, the 
Moesogothic, and the Mcesogothic alone, has given us 
data of any notable value. 

«. 'Ptut Tenm of the Indicative Mood, 

"Singular, Dual, Plural, 

1. Nasi-^-a — HBm-d-kdwai 

2. Na8i-(2-S8 nBsi'd-tdvitB na8i-<f-Mu> 
•3. Na8i-<^-a — nAsi-d-MvLm 

^, Tatft Tense of the Conjunctive Mood. 

Singular. Dual. Mural. 

1. Nasi-<:?-d(fjaa — nasi-<i-6cfeima 

2. 'SsMi-d'^deia mkBi-d-^dutB nasi-rf4rfei)> 

3. Nasi-<^^di — nasi-d'^deimx 

This ^ves us not only one -d, but two ; and if we 
^ke the second -d in ruisidedum, and connect it with 
the explanation of the second -d in did, the element* 
of a hypothesis emerge ; and the notion that the -d in 
loved, originally one of the -cJ® in nasi-ded-um, is an 
abbreviated and postpositive did, the Perfect of do, 
presents itself: and when we bring into our criticism 
such combinations as / did love from our own lan- 
guage; and such Tenses as parlerai and parlero from 
the French and Italian (=1 have to s]^eak= loqui 
habeo), neither the incorporation of the two words, nor 
the change of their place by transposition, presents any 
notable difficulties. 

This doctrine, suggested rather than positively laid 
down by Grimm, has gained ground. More, however, 
will be said about it hereafter. 

§ 35 L iTicidence of the change when the redupli- 
cation is lost — When words like Tsrv(f)a and yiypcufM 
are reduced to dissyllables by the loss of one of their 
consonants, which of the two is the lost one ? 


When from the earlier reduplicate pepigi we get 
the later and non-reduplicate form pegi, which of the 
p^ is lost and which retained? Is the initial -j>- 
cut-oflF, or the p of the middle part of the word 
elided ? 

When we get, from the earlier reduplicate, fe-feal 
(fe-feol or the like), feoU (Jell from faU\ is it the -/- of 
the main word which is rejected, and the / of the 
initial reduplication preserved, or vice versa ? This is 
not a point on which we can decide, off-hand, by any 
general rule. A careful investigation may give us one 
of the alternatives in one word, and the other in another ? 

§ 352. I believe this to be the case in English. 
The -/i- which is lost in higkt (hiht) and held is the one 
which stood in the middle of the older word, or the 
radical one. The h- which is preserved is the one 
which stood at the beginning of the older word, or the 
h of the reduplication. But A, a mere aspirate, be- 
tween two vowels, is not only a sound which is easily 
elided, but one which scarcely ever keeps its place. It 
by no means follows that, because in words like higld 
(Jiiht) and hekl the radical consonant (if A can so be 
termed) is elided, 6, p, t, cZ, &c., or combinations like 
8iu, «^ «fe, «c, or a triad of consonants like the spr^ in 
aprlncf should be elided also. Each sound should be 
considered on its own merits ; i.e. its likelihood to keep 
its place or to lose it ; and we know that no consonants, 
in this respect, are exactly in the same condition. The 
Semivowels are not very stable. The Palatals k and g 
liave an inordinate tendency to change, and when they 
become y or lo^ or A, may comport themselves as the A- 
in Itiffht (Jiiht) and heUL The Continuous consonants 
may run into the Semivowels, especially v into w, and 
then come under the conditions of the pre-eminently 
unstable h. When we get to pairs of consonants like 


8t^ sk, gr, &c., and a fortiori^ to such combinations as 
8pr~, acT'y and the like, the chances of elision are re- 
duced to a Tainimum : for it is manifestly easier to 
drop the non-radical prefix. 

§ 353. Individually, I believe that it is this turn-radi- 
cal prefix of the reduplication which, as a general rule, 
is dropped ; and that in those few instances where the 
elision of the radical consonant occurs, it is due to special 
causes, and is wholly exceptional. That so unstable a 
sound as that of -h between two vowels should drop out is 
natural, and that, out of the two vowels thus brought 
into contact, a single one, with mixed characters, and 
more or less diphthongal in character, should be deve- 
loped, I hold to be part of the change. But I consider 
that the change is a rare one. If the vowels that are^ 
thus formed, i.e. by a process of contraction, are of 
that character that nothing but contraction of the kind 
under notice will account for, I must admit that, where 
they occur, they are evidence not only of reduplication^ 
but of a previous elision of the radical consonant from 
the middle of the word, rather than the dropping of the 
reduplicate syllable at the beginning of it. This last 
I hold to be the ordinary and natural process, and, 
except where the consonant is of that unstable cha- 
racter that it is pretty certain of being elided, or the 
resulting vowel of that peculiar character which 
nothing less than contact and contraction would pro- 
duce, I hold that this initial consonant is the one 
which, when the word was reduplicate, stood in the 
middle of it ; that it now stands at the beginning, 
because the reduplication has been dropped ; and, 
above all, that it is the original consonant of the 

§ 354. The forms with which we have to deal in 
English are those wherein the reduplication has been 


lost, SO that the only difference between the Perfect and 
the Present is a change of vowel. 

Of these changes there are two kinds. 

(1) The first and oldest is that which we find in the 
Greek, Latin, and Moesogothic, in words like TsJXoiiray 
aeaifrre, riOeixa^ yiypa(f)a — peperij peperci^fefeUi — sai^ 
slep^ gae-grot^ lai-lo {=8lepty wept, laughed). Here 
the change is, for aught we know to the contrary, as 
old as the reduplication itself ; but that it is concurrent 
with the reduplication, and wholly independent of any 
process connected with the loss of it, is evident. 

(2) The second is that which we found in the 
form hight {hiht)= called. Here the change is not so 
much concurrent with the reduplication as consequent 
upon it. 

§ 355. In § 330 we may see that the first word in 
English in which the retention up to the present 
time of a fragment of the old system of the reduplica- 
tion of the Perfect was detected was d/id : and that the 
second was hight {MM), To these we now add held ; 
in A. S. heold ; in 0. H. G, hialt {^hei-halt), in the 
present German hielt, in the M. G. hai-hald. 

Upon did there is no remark to be made. 

In hight {hiht) we find the second -A- still pre- 
served in the spelling: and, as we know that this 
second -A- is not the h that is sounded, and that if it 
were not for the spelling it would be non-existent, the 
inference that, in one word at least, it is the radical 
sound of the middle of the word which is lost, and the 
Tum-radical sound of the beginning that is preserved, is 

That the same is the case in held is, perhaps, 
equally certain ; although it is not so eas'ily seen : for 
the second h is not preserved in the spelling; and, 
moreover, the -e- is short. The German forms, how- 


ever, hialt and hidt, remove any doubt upon this 

§ 356. That in both these words it is the radical 
-A- that has disappeared, and the reduplicated -h that 
is retained, is generally admitted. The fex5t, however, 
is one which suggests questions which are by no means 
so clear. Thus — 

(1) What are the details, and nature, of the pro- 
cess ? 

(2) What is its effect on the vowel ; and 

(3) How many words are there like hight3,ndhM^ 

(1) There are three processes by which a conso- 
nant in the position of the second -A- in haihait can 
be either displaced or eliminated altogether. 

(a) The second -di- may be dropped out ; in which 
case the A- is brought into immediate contact with 
the final -t. 

(b) The second -ai- and the second -A- may change 
places ; in which case the word becomes haiaiht. Either 
of these processes will give such forms as hiht : and, in 
either case, the -A- is retained. 

(c) The -A- may drop out altogether ; in which case 
the word becomes haiait^ and the radical -A is wholly 

(2) Each of these processes has a different effect on 
the vowel or vowels. 

(a) That of the first is very simple in one respect; 

♦ In the following extract from Uhland's ballad * The Blind King' 
it is used, as held would not be used in English, with the sense ot 'has 
held,' i.e. the sense of a Perfect rather than a Preterit 

Sohn, der Feind ist Kiesenstark, 

Ihm hielt noch keiner Stand ; 
Und, doch, in Dir ist edles Mark, 

Ich fiihl's am Bruck der Hand. 


veiy complex in another. So &r as it reduces the two 
vowels to one it is very simple. So far, however, as it 
brings the middle consonant in contact with the final 
one, it is very complex : the chief complication being 
the identity of its results with the second process ; or 
the one now coming under notice. 

(b) It is clear, as has already been indicated, that 
whether, in a word like haihait, we merely transpose 
the second ai or eject it altogether, contact of the -A- 
and the -t is the result. So &r, then, the action of 
the two processes is the same. In respect, however, to 
the -ai- of the first syllable the diflference is consider- 
able. If the second -ai be simply ejected the result is 
haikt. If transposition take place it is haiaiht But 
this brings two vowels in contact with one another, 
and where such contact occurs changes of some sort are 
to be expected : and this means that, except where the 
middle consonant is retained in situ or the second 
vowel is ejected altogether, this contact of vowels takes 
place, and, with it, the results in the way of change. 
The vowels may, of course, touch one another, like 
marbles in a bag, without cohering. But of these cases 
we take no heed ; for they leave their verb with just as 
many syllables as it had in the beginning. 

§ 357. When two vowels have become one the pro- 
cess may safely be called one of contraction. The 
prior process, however, which brings them together is 
not so simple. It may be the transposition {Meta^ 
thesis), or it may be the absolute elision and elimina- 
tion of the vowel. In a word like lailaik, the M. G. of 
laikan, transposition gives us laiailk ; elision, laiaik ; 
in each of which the vowels come together. 

In this the two processes agree. But, in a much 
more important matter they are in diametrical opposi- 
tion. When the consonant of the root has been ejected 


it is got rid-of once and for ever. When it is only 
transposed it keeps its place. It may be subsequently 
ejected : but this is unimportant. Provided that any 
older stage of the language has transmitted to us a 
true instance of Metathesis the reality of one of the 
processes by which vowels become contracted is 
assured. Now, in the history of the verb laikan^ we 
have such an instance. 

§ 358. This, however, leads us to the following 
table, which is taken from March's Comparative Gramr 
mar^ p. 81 ; and may be found, in substance, in Morris, 
Outlines^ &c., § 265 : — 

Gothic haldan, hold, perf. hdihald; 0. H. G. kaltan, heiaU>Ualt> 

Gothic stdutan, strike, perf. stdistdut ; 0. H. G. sidzan^ stBroz {r<ii) 

> steoz, stioz* 
Gothic Mitan, call, perf. hdihdU ; A. Sax. hdtan, heht < hSMt. 
Gothic redatiy rede, perf. r&iroth\ A. Sax. rSdatit reord<r4rod. 
Gothic Ulan, let, perf. l&ilot\ A. Sax. Idtan, le6rt (r</, * • *)< 

Gothic Mikan, leap, perf. Idildik; A. Sax. Mean, le6lc<ldldc. 

A. Sax. on-drcedan, <m-dmrdy 


This gives in record from rai-rdth^ and fe-ofc from 
lailak^ as good instances of transposition as we can 
expect. By the change, in lailot^ of the second -/- 
into r-, the evidence is not quite so clear. In Mun, 
however, as well as in drcedan and stautauj the change 
is in the way of Metathesis or Transposition. With 
heht and hialt there is doubt : because h is not a con- 
sonant that retains its character through a change of 
position so well as the ordinary mute and liquids. It 
is a much more distinct sound in Aa, he^ ho^ and hu. 
than in ah^ eh^ oh^ and uA, where it may change into a 
tone, an accent, a guttural gh, and what not? In 
England such a sound as haht^ if the h and a changed 


places, would ere long be sounded .as ate or ait ; in 
Scotland as a^ht or acht. In England it would die out 
altogether. In Scotland it might become aw or a/, or 
the like — indeed, this is a matter that a Scotchman is 
better able to investigate than an Englishman. But in 
no case would it stand between the vowel of the redu- 
plication and the vowel of the main word, and, by 
being wholly ejected, bring the two into contact, coa- 
lescence, or anything out of which a teriium quid could 
be developed. On the other hand, if there were no 
transposition, but merely the di'opping of the second 
vowel, there would be nothing vocalic with which the 
vowel of the reduplication could come in contact. We 
cannot deal with transpositions like aht from hat, as 
with transpositions like ord from rod. Be this as it 
may, the h in hight (hiht) is not the h in haihait 
ejected. If it were it would have no place in the word 
at all. All we know of it is its relation to the final -t. 
How it stood in respect to its vowel we know not. It 
would be in contact with -t if it were transposed ; and 
it would also be in contact with -t, if the vowel by 
which it was followed were dropped. 

And this tells us that the statement hitherto made 
concerning hight {hiht) as (next to nlid) the second 
Perfect in oiu: language which was foimd to have re- 
tained its reduplication, is perhaps, to some extent, 
inaccurate. We find it in writing : and on paper it 
may be said to survive. But we have no knowledge as 
to what it was in language^ or how it was sounded, or 
whether it was sounded at all. Hence, it is not so much an 
actual reduplicate as a word in which the evidence of 
its original reduplication is preserved. In hialt^ heialt 
we have no A at all : and the probability that the -A- 
really was elided is somewhat better. But it is clear 
with all the other words, that though we have un- 


doubted examples of transposition, the word held is the 
only instance hitherto found of what we may call the 
elision of the radical consonant m situ ; i.e. its ejeo- 
tion from its proper place between the vowel of the 
main word and the vowel of the reduplicational prefix; 
and even this may be reduced to either the loss of the 
second vowel or to reduplication, followed by the elimi- 
nation of the -A. But with so imstable a sound the 
determination of the exact process of its ejection is 
unnecessary. Any change— almost no change at aU— 
is sufficient. 

§ 359. This is a long dissertation. But the list is 
an important one. Until lately most of us considered 
the so-called Strong Verbs as forms like XtXjoiira or iri- 
iroida minus the reduplication ; and this is, probably, 
the view which presents itself in the first instance. 
But Professor March's list, with which Dr. Morris 
agrees, to say the least, disturbs it. It draws attention to 
the fact that in hight the* initial h is that of the prefix* 
It shows that in reord and leolc we have a new element, 
that of transposition ; and that in hiaU we have, pro- 
bably, the elision of the h in situ. By this the num- 
ber of verbs wherein the consonant of the root has 
given way to the consonant of the prefix is increased; 
for, though stautan^ reda/n, and laikan are either obso- 
lete or obsolescent, whilst dread is only used as a Pre- 
terit, the i- in let is more likely to be the second -i- in 
Idildt than the first : and what may have happened to 
Idildt may have happened to other words under similar 
conditions ; the only difference between the two groups 
being that for one of them a rnodicum of evidence has 
been discovered, which has not been discovered for the 
other, and which, probably, though the changes may 
have taken place, never will be. 

I am not, then, inclined to limit the number of the 


Perfect forms in English wherein the initial letter repre- 
sents the reduplication rather than the root, to the few 
individual instances for which a record of the change 
has come down to us. J7, with its natural instability, 
may drop out anywhere. The semivowels, too, may 
drop out readily ; though not so readily as -A-. With 
-Z- and -r-, two of the Liquids, transposition begins ; 
and — so far as our present evidence goes — ends. Other 
words beginning with the same sounds may have 
changed even as rairdth and IdUdt changed — or they 
may not. The two liquids under notice are, pro- 
bably, more liable to transposition than the other con- 
sonants ; and among the consonants some are more 
liable than others. Upon all this, when, by a wide 
induction, which has yet to be made, we know what 
conditions favour certain changes, and the extent to 
which one of them differs from another, we may, in 
default of special evidence, consider the probabilities of 
this word having for its initial the consonant of the root, 
or that word having for its initial the consonant of the 
reduplication. But here, I submit, we must stop ; taking 
the old view that the initial conBonant is the consonant 
of the root until reasons be given for the contrary. 

§ 360. I have written at length upon this point 
because the question is a new one ; because the diffe- 
rence between transposition and elision has not been 
sufficiently recognized ; and, specially, because I think, 
either rightly or wrongly, that there is a tendency to 
invest the exceptional cases hehty held, let, &c., with 
something like the value of a rule, and to put forward 
the doctrine that the initial consonant is, at least, as 
often Tum^radical as radical — perhaps oftener — ^perhaps 
so often as to constitute the rule rather than the ex- 

Whether this be the right interpretation of the 


following extracts — ^where it is the two chief expoimders 
of this doctrine that are quoted — ^is one matter ; the 
accuracy of the doctrine itself is another. Whether 
this be the right interpretation of the expressed 
opinions of such influential writers as Professor March 
and Dr. Morris is a point upon which the reader must 
be the judge. 

T^ofesaor March writes — 

' Traces of the process of contraction are found in the 0. H. G., &c., 
in the following Anglosaxon -words.* * * * 

These are found in the list as it appears in the pre- 
sent work, p. 380. He continues : — 

' The repeated consonants weaken^ andfinaUy fall out and let the towels 
together. In the Anglosaxon relics the first root consonant is saved bj 
metathesis with the root vowel. These contractions at first gave rise to 
seroral different vowels and diphthongs found in 0. H. German. Con- 
formation in analogy with ablaut has brought them to a uniform eoati 
in Anglosaxon.' — Comparative Grammar j p. 81. 

This 'process of contraction,^ and these 'repeated 
consonants,'' which, standing as they do between two 
vowels, are, manifestly, the consonants of the main 
word, certainly suggest something which is much more 
like an ordinary process of the language, with some 
scope and generality in its operation, than anything 
of the limited character indicated by the list of 

Dr. Morris writes — 

' In the Latin, Gothic, and 0. E. forms the vowel change shows tkat 
the initial letter of the root has gone, and the first cotmoiumt is the 
initial of the reduplicated syllable. Thus, Latin fugi^sfu^fug-i^j^ 
-f ug-i. 

Thus we see the perfect of facia was probably formed : (1) fa-facA\ 
(2)fe-fic-i; (Z)fei-ci; (^)feci. 

In languages of the Teutonic group we have even clearer example 
of reduplication and of the loss of * ♦ * In our verb held the firrt * 
is the reduplicated letter. The vowel e is the result of the union of the 
vowel of the reduplicated sgllable with that of the root.* 

OutUnes, fc, { 264. 


The list follows ; in no essential respect different 
from that of Professor March : so that, as far as this 
goes, the data are the same with both writers. 

Here, the vowel change is indicated as an instru- 
ment of criticism; being treated as evidence to the 
disappearance of the vowel of the root — i.e. not only 
to the fjEict of the loss of a reduplicate syllable, but to 
the change of vowel as connected with it. Here, how- 
ever, new data are brought in ; viz., the lengthening of 
the vowels in fugi and fed from fu-fugi and fe-fv^ 
in Latin. Valeoit quantum. 

All this applies exclusively to the cases where the 
radical consonant has disappeared, and, if there were 
no cases where the change of vowel is concurrent with 
the reduplication, the reasoning would be sufficiently 
exigent. But, with a language like the Greek, where 
the &ange of vowel and the concurrent persistence of 
the reduplication have lasted from the time of Homer 
to the present time, there is, to say the least, a great 
deal to set against it. 

§ 361. Amount of the Red/upUcation. — ^How much 
of the fundamental verb, or theme, was taken to form 
a Perfect of which the reduplication is the character- 
istic ? Was it that of the whole word, or only that of 
the beginniug of it ? Did the Greek yiypa<pa and the 
Latin Truymordi arise out of ypa<f>'+ypafl>-j and Tnord- 
-i-mord-j or only out of the initial consonants 7- and 
m H- a connecting vowel ? The first view may be the true 
one ; but the reasons for its being so are by no means 
generally known and recognised ; nor do they lie so 
much on the surfisuse as to speak for themselves. It is 
certain, however, that there are degrees in the process. 
The Latin apo-epondi and the M. G. stav^taut repeat 
more of the fundamental verb than the Greek TsrvifM 

c c 

386 ^ QUOTH.' 

and 7aypa^a. The judgment in favoiu: of the whole word 
being doubled, is founded upon an a priori view as 
to the probability of one out of two processes ; and, so 
far as it discards the more artificial one, is sound. But 
still it is a view a priori : and this is so much as need 
be said about it. 

§ 362. The -d- m did, as the real or supposed sign 
of the Preterit. — To those who have gone with suflS- 
cient care throu/^h the details of the question as to 
whether, in such c r such a Perfect, the initial consonant 
is that of the root or that of the reduplication, and 
who also hold that the -c2 in hved is one of the d* in 
did^ it must be clear that the same question must be 
gone into again. 

The -d in loved is one of the d' in did. Which of 
them ? The present writer is not aware that the ques- 
tion has been raised : neither has he any InclinatibD to 
raise it. He rather recommends a suspension of judg- 
ment as to the doctrine which underlies it. Seen from 
one side only, the suggestion of Grimm (and it was only 
a suggestion), it is plausible. But it suits the Preterit 
(/ loved) much better than the Participle {lam loved): 
and very little, if anything, has been done towards 
explaining the connection, if real ; or accoimting for 
the Participial -(2, if we separate it from that of the 
Tense. The doctrine that the two must be separated 
is the reco^mised one ; in which case the -<2 in 7 097^ 
loved is the -^ of the Greek and Latin ^ and 6* in such 
Past Passive Participles as amatus and iroifjOiU. 

§ 363. Quoth. — ^This word, though obsolete, like 
hight {hiht) and ydeped, claims notice. It is pre- 
eminently the Defective word in our language. It is 
only found in one form : that of the Past Tense, and 
generally (if not exclusively) in the Third Person 
Singular. Moreover, it is followed, rather than pre* 

* AM ' — ' BE ' — ^ was! 387 

ceded, by its Pronoun — quothrhe ; and this, again, is 
sometimes reduced to -a — quothni ; in which case the 
two words may be treated as a single one. 

It is purely Defective ; for it has no Complement : 
or, if it has one, the Complement is all on one side. 
We may indeed say that the forms wanting to quoth 
are made good by say ; as / 8ay=^I {queath) ; he say a 
=she (queatli8)j &c. But say itself is complete in all 
its inflections : so that there is nothing on the part of 
say for queath to make good. 

This is Defect on its smallest scale : or reduced to 
its lowest terms ; i.e. to a single form with a single 
power, and no Complement. Of the other extremes or 
Defect on a great scale, we get the best sample in the 
relations of the Strong and Weak Tenses, i.e. the Per- 
fects and Preterits. 

As an element in a compound it has as full and 
regular an inflection as any verb in the language, 
though with a change of meaning — I bequeath, he be- 
gueathsy bequeathed (PTeteTit),bequeathing, bequeathed 
(Participle). In compounds, however, the Past Tense 
is a Preterit, whereas in the simple word it was a 
Perfect. And so it is with the Past Participles. The 
A. S. inflection was — cwethan, cwethe, cwath, gecweden 
(as opposed to bequ^eathed). 

§ 364. * ^m ' — * jBe ' — * Few.'— These are what 
are called Auxiliary Verbs — and that rightly. They are 
not, however, the only ones ; for have, shall, and others 
are also Auxiliary. Still the three under notice form a 
natural class. They are often called Irregular : and, in 
some sense, they are so. Their truer and better cha- 
racteristic is the very conspicuous combination of 
Defect and Complement. 

They are (1) Am, &c.; {2)Be\ and (3) Was. Of 
these the second, with its forms be, being, been (and 

CO 2 


the archaic 6e68^= the Latin e8 and 8i8\ has nothing 
exceptional. ^ 

In the third there is a slight amount of irregolarily 
in the two obsolescent forms in -^ — waat and wert. 

The first demands more notice. It is the only verb 
in English which represents the Greek verb in -/*i; 
and it varies so much in the ionn, of its persons that 
without referring to the other Indo-European languages 
for intermediate forms we can scarcely believe that such 
words as am^ is, and the Westsaxon aind, are all dedu- 
cible from one root. 

This root is 8 preceded by a Vowel, and all the 
changes it undergoes may be reduced to the four fol- 
lowing processes : — 

1. The omission of the vowel — ^Latin sum for 

2. The changes of «- itself — 

a. Before the sign of a Person — as aJimi in Zend^ 
slfil in Greek =a«m-i in Sanskrit. 

b. Into r- ; as in art and are in English, and eri 
and er in Scandinavian. 

fomiB of the Latin 8um=se8WiL. 
Sanskrit, Latin. lAthuanic, Bohemian* Servutn, 






























§ 365. Did and Became. — These give us a nearer 
approach to true Irregularity {Catackreais). 

They look like Perfects of the verbs do and 
become^ respectively. But each has two meaningSi 
Did may mean either the Latin fecit or the Latin 
valuit s= was competent, or adequate, to something* 

^mind'* and ^minded' 389 

The Infinitive of dossfacere was dorij the Perfect dide ; 
in Grerman thun^ Perfect thaty Participle gethan. The 
Infinitive of do=ivaIeo was dugan^ the Preterit dugede. 
Hence, Tugejid^vvrt^iej and tiicktich =: doughty. In 
Danish the verb do = fdcio is expressed by flrjore 
{gar)j and there is nothing that corresponds with the 
English do and the German thun. But for the English 
^valeOf and the German taugen, the word duge. Pre- 
terit dugede, is the ordinary verb. In the literary 
Danish the -g- is elided, and dugede det noget ? = was 
it worth anything f is pronounced duede, &c. In 
Norway the -gr- is sounded. In like manner the Middle 
English gives such forms as dow, deah, &c. 

Mutatis mutandis, the same applies to became. 
Became may mean factum est, or it may mean convenit 
=: suited, fitted, did credit to, &c. The Infinitive of 
become^ facere was becuman, the Perfect becam, in 
German becomm^n, becam^ The Infinitive of become 
=z con-venire was becweman, the Preterit becwemede; 
in German beqv^em^n, Preterit bequemede. 

This use of a common Past Tense for two different 
Verbs is now no longer a vulgarism: though it is 
vulgar to say the land was overflown with water. 
The tendency, however, to connect identical Preterits 
^vith different, but similar. Presents, is the same in 
both cases. 

§ 366. Mind and Minded. — ^In / mind my own 
busings the Verb is in the Present Tense, and it ends 
in -d. In / minded my own business it is in the 
Preterit Tense and has two d*. The second according 
to any view is other than radical. But there is a point 
of view from which the first may be non-radical also ; 
in which case the theme is not min-d, but min {mun^ 
&c.), and the single -cZ as extraneous as the second -<2 
in mind-ed. 


MinS, Om^ and (Dare), — Own, in the seose of concede, or grmi 
((rtrsiATL c^*^»% is sometimes placed in the same gzoop with tUl, 
eca. &c : b::r like aiind its inflection is pezfectlj regtilar — / ot% 
ke cwmf, l^ ottned. otnuMff, Ae hu ovned. It is placed, hoveTOTt as it 
Has b«e2. oa a^coant of its connection with atoe and occs, in the seose 
of civic^ia:i ani foaetnon, Nerertheless, the voids are radioHj 

Tit sxsxt applies to dare, whether we nse it in the sense of the I^tin 
€mdj», C7 jprK>voco ( =chattenge). It has, how e r e r, been alreadj noticed. 
Bet this w^as not so much on its own acconnt as on account of its close 
eocaect:oB with dsnt. In itself it is pezfectly legnlar — 1 dan, it 
A.crw* If ^Vrr.:', daring. 

§ S6T. Exceptions and Irregularities. — ^Exceptions 
to niles are not always irregular ; though the etymology 
of the word suggests that they should be. But rules 
may be unduly stiingent, or less comprehensive than 
they should be, WTien they are so it is sometimes the 
fault of the grammarian ; but oftener his misfortune. 
Of I-anguage itself regularity is the foundation. But 
fv^r the general purposes of Granmiar we cannot di\'id(? 
and sub-divide, explain and refine, until rules defeat the 
object for which they were meant. If it were not so, 
the ^roat achievement of a rule of some notable gene- 
Rility without an exception might be practicable. It 
is known, however, that there are but few of them. 
And this is why the present distinction is made. Irre- 
gularities, so far as they contravene certain rules, will 
alw;\ys exist. But Irregularities which are wholly in- 
explicable, irreducible, and limited to individual in- 
stanci^ ai\^ rare — ^perhaps non-existent. 

Of had and made the older forms are hcefde and 
DMKXHfc* ; the irregularity being limited to the ejection 
of the -tv* and -(i-. 

In coidd (A. S. ciL^e) the -?- is the 4- of shovU 
ai\d ivoiddy foisted in by a false analogy. 

\fent and go are the Tenses of different verbs ; the 

ItSTBOSPfiOI. 391 

former of we7id:=itumed ; so went his way^wended 
(turned) his way* 

How little the ordinary Perfects and the Preterits 
like sought and wrought deserve the name of irregular 
has been seen. Even could is a piece of bad spelling 
rather than an irregularity of language — for, except 
under the influence of the printer, few of us pronounce 
the -i-. 

§ 368. Retrospect. — ^We now have gone through 
the Conjugation of the Verb, and may repeat the pro- 
cess which was suggested by the Declension of the 

The most we can get is — 

(1) For Mood, Number, and Persons, the sound of 
-« ; with -0 or -e« according to its phonetic relations — 
and this is Indistinctive (or rather iVbn-distinctive) as 
against the -« of the Possessive Singular, the Nomina- 
tive Plural and occasional Possessive Plural. 

(2) For the Present Participle -dug; with which 
the Verbal in -dng is Confluent. 

(3) For the Perfect Participle -en ; which has long 
ceased to be Operative, and is Obsolescent as a form. 

(4) For the Perfect Tense there is change of Vowel; 
wholly obsolete as applied to new words, and obsolescent 
as a form ; though going out more slowly than the Par- 

(5) For the Preterit Tense and Participle -d, -t, or 
-«d. These are in full force, but Non-distvnctive in 
respect to one another. 

Hence of those that are in operation the three 
forms in -« constitute the half ; and these are Kon- 
distinctive: the only two that are distinctive (spoke 
and spoken) being obsolete. 

.Yet with all this the English Language may be 
measured against any one on the face of the earth for 


flexibility and comprehensiveness. This is because it is 
rich in combinations which do the work of Inflections, 
and which sometimes convey distinctions to which even 
languages so Synthetic or Inflectional as the Greek and 
Latin are inadequate. As such they belong to Syntax ; 
and to Syntax these concluding remarks in the Etymo- 
logical portion of our work lead us. 





§ 369. The word Syntax is derived irom the Greek 
words eyn {with or together) and taods {arrangement). 
It relates to the arrangement or putting together of 
words. Etymology deals with the forms of single 
words ; Syntax, with the combination of more words 
than one. 

§ 370. The notice of the Compomids of a language 
leads &om Etymology to Syntax ; for it is clear that in 
expressions like hot-headed and hom-blowerj &c., we 
have something more than an individual word, and, 
consequently, something which, in some sense, belongs 
to syntax. We have two words at least. In some cases, 
as in midshi/pmanj &c., we have three. We also have 
them in a state of combination. The combination, 
however, constitutes but a single word. 

§ 371. It is not always an easy matter to distinguish 
between two separate words and a Compound ; a fact 
which has already been suggested. A crow is a bUick 
bird. It is not, however, a hlacldmd. The best cri- 
terion is the accent. When the two words are equally 
accented, the result is a pair of separate words, con- 
nected with one another, according to the rules of 
Syntax : the crow is a black bird {nigra avis). When 

394 NAMES* 

the two words are unequally accented the result is a Com- 
pound, as the bldcJcbird is aJdn to the thrush {mervla). 

§ 372. In etymology we declvne and conjugate ; in 
syntax we parse. Parsing is of two kinds; logical 
and etymological. Logical parsing gives the analysis 
of sentences according to their terms and copulas, 
telling us which is the subject and which the predicate, 
which the chief, and which the secondary, parts of each. 
Etymological parsing gives the analysis of sentences 
according to the parts of speech of which they are com- 
posed. It tells us which is the noun, and which the 
verb, &c. It separates adjectives from substantives, 
pronouns from adverbs, and the like. It deals with 
numbers, cases, persons, &c. 

§ 373. Names. — ^There are more than a million of 
persons in London, and each of these has a name. 
There are more than ten thousand towns and villages 
in England, and each of these has one also. There are 
more than fifty racehorses at Newmarket, no one of 
which is without its name. Yet London and New- 
market are only parts of England, and England is only 
a part of the world in general. Persons too, and town?, 
villages, and racehorses are mere fractions of the whole 
collection of the inmunerable somethings, real or ima- 
ginary, of the imiverse. Have all these names ? They 
have and they have not. They have not names in the 
way that the persons of London, the towns and villages 
of England, and the racehorses of Newmarket have. 
They have not names like Thomas^ Hammersmith, or 
Eclipse. Nevertheless they have all names. The 
thousands of Johns, Thomases, Janes, and Marys, that 
occupy London, are all persons, men, women^ boys, 
girls, children, as the case may be. The numerous 
Eammersmitlis, Newmarkets, &c., are sM places, towns, 
villages, hamlets, &c., as the case may be. The fifty 


Eclipses, &c., at Newmarket, are all horses, Toares, 
&c., as the case may be. The Hammersmiihs, &c,^ 
constitute part of an indefinite collection of individual 
places, towns, or villages ; the words place, town, viU 
lage, being names for the class or collection thus con- 
stituted. The Eclipses, &c., of Newmarket, constitute 
part of an indefinite collection of individual horses, 
the word horse being a name for the classes to which 
these Eclipses, &c., belong. This* leads us to a great 
twofold division of all names whatsoever ; names being 
either Individual or Common. 

§ 374. An Individual name is one which denotes 
a single object and no more. A Common name is one 
which denotes a whole class of objects. 

Thomas is a single and particular individual of the 
class called man : Julius Cmsar, a single or particular 
individual of the class called conquerors. Or it may 
be that we look upon him rather as a hero. In that 
case he is an individual of the class of heroes. But 
whether he be a conqueror, a hero, or a w^an, he is 
still Juli/us Ccesar ; for this is what he is as an indi- 
vidual, irrespective of the particular class under which 
it may please the speaker to place him, and indepen- 
dent of any class at all. 

Examples of this sort may be given ad infinitura. 
The main point, however, to be remarked, remembered, 
and reflected on, is the following : Common names 
apply to things of which there may be more than one. 
Individual names apply to things of which there is 
one and no more. 

There are many towns, but there is only one Lon- 
don ; many men, but only one Thomas ; many con- 
queroTS, but only one Julius Caesar. 

Individual names may, also, be called 2>rapernames, 
and there are many good writers who habitually call 

396 NAMES. 

them so, preferring the term proper to either amgtdar 
or indwidvAjl. The reason for this lies in the feet of 
individual names being appropriated or made proper 
to certain single individual objects to which they are 
exclusively attached. 

Common names may also be called general; and 
there is no objection to the term. It is possible, indeed, 
that it may be the better one of the two. 

§ 375. Individual names are essentially si/ngtilarj 
and it is a conmion as well as true statement, that no 
individual name can be plural. A granmiarian 
would say that no proper narrve can he phiral. How, 
then, can we use such expressions as both the Bostons 
are important sea-ports^ or, as long as Mceccenases 
abound^ Maros will he plentiful — Sint Moecamat^ 
non deeruni, Flacce, Marones ? 

The Boston in Lincolnshire is a different town from 
the Boston in Massachusetts ; so, though the same 
combination of sounds or letters applies to both, it 
cannot be said that the same name is so applied. The 
same name is one thing; the same word applied to 
different objects is another. A name is only so 
fer individual as it applies to some individual 
object. The two Bostons, however, are different 

The case of Mceccenas and VirgU is different. Here 
there are but two individuals ; one IMsecsenas, and one 
Virgil. But the femous Msecsenas is something more 
than the particular patron of Virgil. He is the sample, 
type, or representative of patrons in general* Virgil, 
in like manner, is something more than the particular 
poet patronised by Msecamas. He stands for poets in 
general. Hence, the meaning of the Latin line, and 
of the English sentence that preceded it, is this : — As 
long as there are men like Mceccenas, there will also be 


rrant Wee Virgil. But a man like Msecaenas is a-patron, 
and a man like Virgil a poet. Hence — As long as there 
are pcUrons there vdU be poets also. " 

§ 376. We now come to four new terms, that mutu- 
ally illustrate each other. They run in pairs — (1 and 
2), Svhstance and Attribute ; (3 and 4), Abstrad; and 

Take (for instance) an orange. It strikes our senses. 
We see with our eyes that it is more or less round, i.e. 
that it is endowed with the property or quality of 
roundness. We see, too, that it is more or less yellow, 
i.e. that it is endowed with the property or qucUity of 
yellowness. We see that it is more or less smooth, i.e. 
endowed with the property or quality of smoothness. 
Our eyes tell us all this ; the sight being the sense by 
which our belief as to the properties in question is con- 
veyed to us. They tell a great deal more ; but this it 
is unnecessary to enlarge on. 

On the strength of all this we say that an orange is 
rouTid, yellow, sniooth, capable of exciiing sounds, fra- 
grani, sapid, elastic, &c. 

When we say that an orange is this, we aUribute 
to it certain properties, or qualities. What are they ? 
The qualities, or properties, of roundness, yeUowness, 
smoothness, sonorousness, fragrancy, sapidity. 

And how do we speak when we say that we do so ? 
It is convenient to begin with saying how we do not 
speak. We do not say that an orange has the property 
of rouTid, yellow, smooth, &c. On the contrary, we say 
that it has the property of round-ness, yeUow-^ess, 
snu>oth''7iess, &c. 

So much for the attributes of an orange ; at least, 
for some of them. The attributes of a guinea, a 
loaf, a man, 2^ fish, or anything else, may be considered 
in the same way. They are, of course, when taken 


altogether, diflferent from those of an orange. The 
principle, however, of considering them is the same. 

Let us now suppose that all these attributes are, one 
by one, taken away, and replaced by otJters ; that in- 
stead of an orange striking our eyes and sense of touch 
as round, it strikes them as square, or rhomboid ; that it 
loses its fragrance and becomes fetid ; that it sounds 
like a bell, and tastes like a loaf of bread. Would the 
object still be an orange ? Would it not be something 
else ? This leads to the question of the essential attri- 
butes or essences of things. We need not mind them 
for the present ; but may turn our thoughts in a some- 
what diflferent direction. 

Divest the orange of all its attributes witJumt sujh 
plying it with new ones. What will it be then ? Take 
away its original colour without replacing it by any 
fresh one. Let it lose its softness without becoming 
hard, its roundness without becoming of any other 
form. Annihilate its weight, taste, and smell. Let it 
have no means of appealing to eye, ear, taste, smell, or 
touch, so that it become, at one and the same time, in- 
palpable, invisible, imperceptible. What will it be 
then ? Will it be anything ^t all ? 

What becomes of the attributes ? We have seen 
that they were taken away. What was done with 
them ? They were taken away separa4;ely, and it is 
separately that they are put aside. JRoundmess and 
yellowness no longer go together. Each is in its own 
place; and that is a place by itself. No link now 
unites them ; the orange in which they met being no 

But we may unite them a&esh ; say in the idea of 
a golden ball, a guinea, a full moon, &c. And we may, 
also, separate them, again and again. United, they 
give the idea of an object clear, palpable, sensible. 



Separated, or abstracted from those objects, they do 
nothing of the kind. Yet the mind takes cognizance 
of them. The idea of the particular attribute of yel- 
lowness, abstracted from an orange, is not much more 
difficult than the idea of the orange minus the attri- 
bute of yellowness. It is merely a case of difference 
and remainder; the additions and subtractions being 
made unconsciously and instinctively. 

What becomes of the orange ? Is it annihilated 
hj the abstraction of .its attributes one and all ? Few 
are prepared to say yes to that question. Few divest 
themselves of the notion that sensible, and material, 
objects are nothing more than the combination of cer- 
tain properties, qualities, and attributes, each and all 
of which may be removed in such a way as to leave an 
absolute nothing. We rather imagine that, where 
there are certain attributes in union, there is a certain 
link which connects them ; a basis, or foundation, which 
supports them ; a basis, or foimdation, different from the 
attributes themselves, but upon which they rest. 

§ 377. This something supports them. This some- 
thing stands unde^' them. This something is the svh^ 
staneCj or understanding, of objects opposed to, and 
'contrasted with, their attributes. Now Concrete terms 
are the names of Substances ; whilst Abstract terms are 


kaik^«AW^^k# , ««»^v • 




Light, &c. 





Reeietanee, Sec 

Fluidity, Sk. 

are Attributes of the 

, Water. 

400 NAMES. 


Vice Versd. 



The Sun, 

are Sabstances with 


Stars, &c. 

the Attributes 


Horse, &c. 


^ AnmaUty. 

§ 378. Variable arid Invariable^ BdaMorud and 
Notional, Names. — Besides being either Proper or 
Common^ and Abstract or Concrete, names are Invaria- 
ble or Variable. 

Words lik^ atone, tree, man, &c., denote certain 
objects which constitute a class including an indefinite 
number of individuals. To any of these the name may 
apply ; but we cannot apply it to an object belonging 
to a different class. It is nonsense to call a tree a 
stone, or a atoTie a tree. Each name applies to the in- 
dividuals of a certain group, and, as it cannot be applied 
otherwise, it is an invariable name. 

All names, however, are not invariable. The word 
/, for instance, is variable. It changes its meaning 
with the person speaking. When William says I, it 
means William; when John says /, it means John. 
So, again, with yovb — ^it denotes the person to whom I 
happen to be speaking at the moment ; but the next 
moment I may alter its meaning by speaking to some- 
one else. The same applies to that, this, these, and 
several other words. 

If a mother say /, it means a mother and SLfemaie; 
if a father say I, it means a father and a male. Even 
if an inanimate object be personified and be supposed 
to speak about itself and to say 7, it means that inani- 
mate object. It denotes the speaker, whoever he may 
be ; but it is not the invariable name of any speaker 
Vt'hatever. Or, it denotes the object spoken of, what^ 


ever it may be ; but it is not the invariable name of 
any object whatever. The word this means a table^ 
when the speaker is talking of tables ; a dog, when he 
is talking of dogs, &c. 

Why are Pronouns Variable ? The answer to this 
lies in the meaning of the word Attribute. An Attri- 
bute, as we have seen, is some property that we sepa- 
rate, or abstract, from a substance. It may be a per- 
manent or inherent one, like the weight, colour, or form 
of a material object ; or it may be a fundamental or 
characteristic one, like the power of growth in a vege- 
table or an animal. But it may also be one which has 
no fixed or permanent character whatever ; and may 
apply to an object only so far as it is in a certain rela- 
tion to the speaker, or to something spoken about. 
Thus the word /, by which Thomas calls himself when 
he is speaking to John, means Thomas only so long as 
Thomas speaks of himself. When he is addressed by 
John, he is addressed as thou or you ; and, so long as 
John addresses him, that is his name. It is, of course, 
his name only so long as John uses it ; but it is his 
name for the ti/me being. When Thomas addresses 
John, the two names change their application, and I 
means Thomas, thou John. Again, when, with two 
oranges lying before me, at dififerent distances, I call 
one this and the other thai, the meaning, import, or 
application of the two words is reversed when I 
change their places. Still, they are names for the time 

Now names of this kind depend on the Relaiions 
of the objects to which they apply ; and as Relations 
change, the import of the name changes with them. 
Hence, they are Variable in respect . to their applica- 
tion, and Pronominal as Parts of Speech. 

The permanent Attributes of an object are called 

D D 


its Qualities. As names they are called Notional^ as 
Parts of Speech they are Svhatantival. 

Number is a Belation rather than a Quality ; and 
hence the Numerals are Pronouns. 

§ 379. Nouns. — ^ Names ^ and ^Nauns.^ — ^The word 
for Noun is, in French, TiOTn. It is the Latin Tumien; 
which means nam^e. Hence, the two words are the 
same in respect to their derivation. But the word 
Name is a current English word ; used by every Eng- 
lishman who has a name, which means by everybody. 
Noun, on the other hand, is a word used in a limited 
sense ; or mainly, if not exclusively, in Grammar only. 
This suggests that the two forms may not, in all cases, 
bear the same meaning; and such is the case. As 
words of the same origin they are the same. As words 
of similar meaning they are also the same. But, 
whether they are words of the saTne meaning has now 
to be considered. 

§ 380. Adjectives as Names; and Abstracts as 
Substantives. — For the purposes of Grammar it is best 
to consider an Adjective as a part of a name, an element 
of a name, a word which suggests a name, but which is 
not a name itself. 

' Adjectires are very improperly called Nouns ; for they are not the 
names of things. The adjectives good and white are applied to the 
Nouns man, snow to express the qualities belonging to those subjects : 
but the names of those qualities in the abstract, considered in them- 
selves, that is, without being attributed to any subject, are goodnm, 
whiteness^ and these are Nouns or Substantives.' 

This is the opinion of Bishop Lowth, and I am not 
aware that, in respect to its assertion of what we call 
the Tton-nominal character of Adjectives, it has ever 
been denied. It has certainly never been refuted. It 
has Tiot affected the ordinary vocabulary of the gram- 
marian ; nor is it necessary that it should do. All that 

< names' and * nouns.' 403 

is necessary is that the word Noun should not be abso- 
lutely, and in every respect, identified with the word 

That words like good and white are not Names 
after the manner of goodness and whiteness^ and 
that words like goodness and whiteness are Names, 
is true. But it does not follow, because goodness and 
whiteTiess are both Names and Nouns, that they are, 
also, Substantives. It is certain that if we take the 
word Substantive in its etymological sense they are not 
Substantives. A word like stone^ gold^ or man, &c., is 
one which implies many Qualities ; or, at least, more 
than one. It is heavy, or hard, or yellow, or m^yrtaly 
and what not ? and heavy, and hard, and yellow are 
words which suggest the names heaviness, hardness, or 
yellovmess, as the names of this or that Quality. 

After saying that a stone is heavy, or that gold is 
yellow (which is merely saying that a stone is a heavy 
thing, or that gold is a yellow thing), the question 
repeats itself. What are words like heavy and yellow ? 
They are parts of the name heavy thing or yellow 
thing. But a part of a name is not a name. That 
the missing part can always be supplied in thought is 
certain : and as this is the case, the words under notice 
are very good names for the purposes of Logic. But 
in Grammar the difierence between white and white 
thing is a wide one. 

The &ct is that words like stone and gold are the 
names of objects that, besides the single quality of 
heaviness and yellowness, have others. When we call 
any object a stone, or gold, the name implies more 
qualities than one ; and of these the most character- 
istic determines the name. This name is a Substan- 
tive ; because something intangible, invisible, and, to 
our senses, wholly inappreciable, is supposed to lie at 

D D 2 


the bottom of these several qualities (to stand under 
them) and to combine them into a unity. But each 
separate quality has no such substance about it. 

So far as their Declension goes. Abstract Nouns are 
Substantival rather than either Pronominal or Adjec- 
tival ; and, such being the case, they are Substantives 
for the purposes of ordinary grammar. There are 
cases, however, where the difiFerence between the true 
Substantive with many Attributes combined, and the 
Abstract Noun, which is the name for a single Attribute 
isolated, is something more than a mere point of deri- 

§ 381. Pronouns as J^fames and as Svistantives. 
— So far as their Declension goes. Pronouns are other 
than Substantival. In English they are (or were) Ad- 
jectival ; or, vice versa, the Adjectival Declension was 
Pronominal. But there are languages in which the 
Adjective, in its Declension, agrees with the Substan- 
tive. In respect to their import Pronouns may stand 
for either a true Substantive (as this stone, that tree) 
or for an Abstract (as this bashfulness surprises me, 
that boldness daurded me). They are Names in both 
cases. But they are not names like either stone and 
tree, or bashfulness and boldm,ess. A stone always 
means a stone as opposed to a tree ; and baahfulness 
can never be converted into boldmsss by merely shifting 
the places of the objects to which the two words apply ; 
as we can do by calling them this and that. 

This, of course, is founded on the fitct of the Pro- 
noun being a name determined by the ReUxtions of an 
object which are changeable ; whilst Substantival and 
Abstract Names are founded upon an Attribute of a 
more permanent kind — and Quality. Hence, the pe- 
culiarity of a Pronoun, as a name, lies in the £Etct of 
its being changeable, temporal, ephemeral^ or whatever 


we choose to call it. Still it is a name for the time 
being — and, as such, though it differs from the true 
Substantive and the Abstract in its Declension, it 
agrees with them in the part it takes in the structure 
of Propositions. 

§ 382. Many-worded Names. —We have seen how, 
in cases of CoTrvposition^ two names may be treated as 
one : e.g., rose-tree^ sun-dial^ &c. In Trddehipmxin we 
have three. How much farther we can go in this direc- 
tion may be seen from the following manipulation of 
such a word as fire : — 

Fire bttnu, 

1. Prefix the definite article. — The fire bums, 

2. Insert an adjective. — The bright fire bums, 
8. Add an adverb. — The very bright fire bums, 

4. Add a participle, and convert bright into its corresponding adverb. 
— The very brighdy-buming fire bums, 

5. Introduce a second substantive, showing its relations to the word 
fire by means of a preposition. — The very brightly-burning fire of wood 

6. Insert which after fire, foUowed by a secondary proposiiion. — 
The very brightly-burning fire which was made this morning of wood 

7. Add another secondary proposition relating to wood. — The very 
brightly-burning fire which was made this morning out of the wood which 
was brought from the country bitms, 

8. Add another secondary proposition by means of a conjunction. — 
The very brightly-blaeing fire which was made this morning out of the 
wood which was brought from the country, beoause there was a sale, &e., 

It is clear that processes like this may be carried 
on ad vafinitv/m^ so that a sentence of any amount of 
complexity will be the result. Notwithstanding all 
this, the primary and fundamental portion of the term 
is manifestly the word^ire. 

These give us many-worded names. 

§ 383. Propositions. — Names which belong as 


much to ' Etyrrwlogy ' as to * Syntax^ lead us to Pro- 
positions which belong wholly to ' Syntax.^ 

The Proposition of the Grammarian is a much 
wider one than that of the Logician ; and it is not the 
Grammarian that has extended it. The Grammarian 
simply takes it as he finds it in Language, and with no 
limitations except those that lie within the domain of 
Language itself. The Logician, on the other hand, 
takes but one sort of Proposition ; and he thus limits 
himself, because it is for one, and for one particular 
purpose only, that he uses it — the purpose of ratioci- 

Tlie one main argument which may be opposed to the views here 
put forward is the doctrine favoured by many grammarians that all 
sentences ought to be reduced to the logical form, consisting of a sub- 
ject, predicate, and copula. That this view of language is all-impoit- 
ant for the syllogism, and, consequently, for argument, is admitted ; 
but it is not admitted that the Urst object in the formation of lan^^uage 
was argument Earlier and more pressing objects were to enunciate 
facts and to give commands. 

In truth the process by which the logician forces (for it is often 
sheer force) every sentence into his favourite form, so as to exhibit the 
so-called substantive verb, is altogether artificial ; and not a little 
harm has been done to grammar by regarding language too much fr<>m 
the logician's point of view. Kei/ : Languagey its Origin and Devehp- 
ment, 187— p. 16. 

The essential character of the Grammarian's Pro- 
position is the fact of its having two elements ; one of 
which tells us what it is that we speak aboutj and the 
other what it is that we say about it If we say / 
walk^ the name of the object spoken about is given in 
the word / ; while walk tells us what the object ex- 
pressed by / does. In who walks ? we have exactly the 
same elements. The Proposition, however, instead of 
saying who does anything, asks what some one does ? 
Nevertheless, who is as good an element in the proposi- 
tion as /. It means somebody I wish to learn something 


about Of course, this is implied rather than directly 
coiiveyed. In a command like walk I there is the 
same amomit of implied meaning. But we know who 
or what is spoken about ; for it is the person addressed. 
He has no explicit, or separate, name ; but he has a 
reality as the Subject of the Proposition ; and from the 
word walk we know what is said about him. Now, of 
these three Propositions the logician excludes both the 
Question and the Command ; for the only Proposition 
that he cares for is that in which something is either 
affirmed or denied. Upon this he can argue, but he 
cannot do so upon Commands or Questions, though in 
both there is something said about something or some- 
body, and also something, or somebody, about which 
something is said. 

§ 384. The Copula. — Whether this * aomethmg 
said ' be said in the way of Affirmation or Denial is all 
that the Logician enquires ; and, for this, he takes a 
third element into his proposition — ^the Copula. He 
might, perhaps, dispense with it, for he might assume 
that, unless there were anything to the contrary, two 
words in apposition would be in the Affirmative. Thus 
weather hot would = not no^hot. But he wants some- 
thing more explicit than this. He wants a word ; and 
language supplies him with ^ ia.^ But before he can 
use it as a copula he has to limit its import in one di- 
rection, to enlarge it in another, and to recognize in it 
little more than its opposition to ^ is not.^ 

Now, whatever may be the Gopular element in Lan- 
guage it is widely different from a word that merely 
says * Tea ' or * iVi? ; ' respecting such or such a state- 
ment, for though it does this with certain modifications 
of its own natural import, it does it with superadded 
notions of Mood, Tense, and Person, of which the logi- 
cian divests it. 


On the other hand, however, the technical lan- 
guage of Grammar is founded on that of Logic ; and 
that to such an extent that the logical proposition has 
assumed the character of the philological one. In the 
present work it will occasionally be necessary to use 
the word ' Copula.* But in most cases it perplexes and 
misleads the grammarian more than it helps him. 

§ 385. Svhjecta and Preddcatea. — On the other 
hand, the logical terms ' Subject ' and * Predicate ' are 

The object concerning which we make an assertion 
is called the Subject. Man, summer, winter, &c., are 
Subjects; and we can assert of them that they are 
mxyrtal, or warm, or cold, &c. ; or the contrary. 

The assertion made concerning any object, or con- 
cerning the subject of our discourse, is called the Predi- 
cate. Mortal, war^n, cold, &c., are Predicates : and 
we can speak of certain things as mortal, warm, cold, 
or the contrary. 

The following words, amongst many others, are 
capable of forming, by thcTnaelves, Subjects : — 






























truth, &c. 

The following words, amongst many others, are 
capable of forming, by themselves. Predicates : — 

good deep shooting hot fatherlike moved 

great happy laughing cold bodily beaten 

red womanly conquered strong essential sifted 

weak atmospheric drifted weak important buried, &c 

There is no subject without its corresponding predi- 


cate ; no predicate without its corresponding subject ; 
and without both a subject and predicate there is no 
such thing as a proposition. Without propositions 
there are no questions, commands, or declarations ; 
and without these, there would scarcely be such a thing 
as language. The little which there would be would 
consist merely of exclamations like oh ! ah ! piah^ Sec. 

(a) The words in Italics (* by themadwes ') claim 
special attention. 

There are plenty of words which can form pa/rta of 
a Subject or of a Predicate ; but a part is one thing, a 
whole another. 

Thus — the Articles a and the can form a part of a 
Subject like the man ; a Tnan ; and so can bravely, as 
he isfightvng bravely, part of a Predicate. 

Words like with and from can do the same ; but 
they must stand between two Nouns — as Ae is with me ; 
it is from heaven, &c. 

Also words like and and or ; but they must 
connect two Subjects — as this and thai ; John or 
Thomas, &c. 

There is, also, one class which can form not only a 
Predicate, but something more ; as / live^I am, liv- 
vng, &c. 

(b) Again — nothing has been said whether words 
which can form a Subject can, or can not, form a Pre- 
dicate as well ; and vice versa, 

(c) Thirdly — concerning words that form a Predi- 
cate and something more, no notice has been taken at 
all. These two questions, like the first, belong to the 
examination of the ' Parts of Speech.^ 

§ 386. DeHaraiions — Commands — Questions. — 
These are the three leading classes of Propositions in 


(a) In the first — which is the chief one — the Sub- 
ject (as a rule) precedes the Predicate, as He is 
brave^ &c. 

(6) In Imperative propositions the Subject when 
expressed (as in walk thou /), for the most part, follows 
it. But it is generally omitted ; as walk ! 

(c) In Interrogative Propositions the Subject and 
Predicate are transposed ; as Whaii is man f Who are 

§ 387. This must be understood to be written solely and 1^110117 with 
the view of showing how thoroughly the Commands and Questions, in 
Language, must not only be recognised, but the extent to which, in the 
way of arrangement, order, or collocation, they hare a Syntax of their 
own, as opposed to that of the Declaratory Propositions. Before we can 
make ' Walk!* a Predicate, we must reduce it to *Be tkau walking;* 
whilst in ' What is Man ? ' the Substantive Verb, with its place between 
the Subject and the Predicate, is, except so far as it is used in a Quet* 
tion, exactly the same as the ordinary logical copula. In the answer 
* Man is itwrtal ' the logical and philological forms are idenlicaL This 
requires explanation ; and it will be given as we proceed. 

The Declaratory, the Imperative, and the Interrogative Proposi- 
tions are the chief ones. But in sentences like How weU you look\ 
and Would I could, we have the two elements — here held to bo both 
essential to a Proposition and necessary to its constitution. If thej 
were more important, it might be necessary to say more about them. 
I do not, however, see how we can deny them the rank of Propositions ; 
though Propositions of a maimed and incomplete character. 

§ 388. Parts of Speech. — * Noun^ * Pronoun^ 
Verb^ Participle {Decline<i\ ^Adverb^^ Preposition^ 
Conjunction, Interjection {Undeclvned). — Such are 
the * Parts of Speech ' in the older Latin G-rammars, 
or, at least, in some of them. In Greek the Article is 
added. Sometimes the Participle (half Adjective, and 
half Verb) is omitted, and, sometimes, the Noun is 
di\dded into the Substantive^ and Adjective. But 
this distinction between the Declined and the Unde- 
dined is natural, and the sequence is unexceptionable ; 


while, in respect to the classes themselves, the Nouns, 
&C.9 are still what they were, and still, as they 
always were, the same in English as in Greek and 

But the tests by means of which we distinguish a 
Noun or an Interjection from anything else have 
changed. The Syntax of every language depends on 
its Etymology, and we have seen what the character of 
the Etymology in English really is. It is that of a 
highly Analytic language— the most Analytic in the 
world — as contrasted with that of the Latin, the 
Greek, and the Sanskrit, the typical representatives of 
the Synthetic stage. 

The French is nearly as Analytic as the English. 
But compare the Adjectives of the two languages. The 
English are wholly destitute of any true Inflection. 
The French has not only le bon phre = the good 
father, but la bonns m^re=:the good mother; not to 
mention the distinction between the Articles. In Latin 
bonv^ pater =: good father; bona mater=^good mo^ 
ther; bonum telum=good weapon. Meanwhile the 
plural nms boni patres, bonce matres, bona tela. The 
Frenchman who said bon mhre or bon/ne phre might be 
accused of making a false concord; inasmuch as he 
would join an adjective in one gender to a substantive 
in another. No Englishman can possibly commit an 
error of this kind ; because in the word good there is 
no change at all, and because, in English, we say good 
father, good mother, good thing, good fathers, good 
mothers, and good things indifferently. 

The same applies to the articles. In French there 
are the forms un and une=sa (or an) ; along with le, 
la, les^ meaning the. Meanwhile, the German says der, 
die, das, einer, eine, eines, where the Englishman says 
simply the and a (or an). Of course, then, the details 


of the syntax of the article must be simpler in English 
than in German. 

But the Greek gives us the extreme contrast. For 
every Inflection in English, the Greek has scores— each 
of which is an outward and visible mark of the place of 
the word in the language. 

The equivalent to these in English is* the place 
that each word takes in the structure of a Proposition. 

Some parts of speech can form terms by thewr 
selves. Others can only form parts of terms. This 
distinction, which is here repeated, should be specially 
attended to. 

§ 389. Details. — The pronoun and the substantive. 

The pronoun and the substantive can, by themselves, 
form either the subject or the predicate. They are 
both names. But the pronoun is a convertible, the 
substantive an inconvertible one. 

The adjective and the participle can, by themselves, 
form the predicate of a proposition. The participle 
dififers from the adjective in implying a corresponding 

The finite verb can form both the predicate and 
the copula. 

The adverb can form no term by itself, but can, 
when associated with a verb, a participle, or an adjec- 
tive, form part of one. 

The preposition can form no term by itself, neither 
can it without two terms capable of doing so. It con- 
nects the two by government. 

The conjunction can form no term by itself, neither 
can it (with a few exceptions) enter into a proposition 
at all. Its presence implies two propositions between 
which it finds place, and which it either connects or 

The affirmative and negative words * Yes * and *JVb' 


can, hy theTnsdveSj constitute a proposition. But they 
always imply, and depend upon, a previous one. 

Haye you done this ? Yes. 
Haye you done this ? No, 

The interjection neither forms nor enters into a propo- 
sition. . 




§ 390. Tlie Concords. — Concord is derived from the 
Latin word concordid, and signifies agreement. 

The word man is the name of a male, and, in re- 
spect to its gender, is masculine. The word she relates to 
a female, and in respect to its gender, is feminine. We 
do not, when speaking of the same person, say I saw 
the man and she saw me ; or I saw ki/m and she saw me. 
If we do, there is a discordance in the matter of 
Gender* On the other, 

I aaw him and he saw me, 
I aaw her and she saw me, 

are concords ; and, as there are more kinds of concords 
than one, this is called the concord of gender. 

The other concords will be noticed in their details 
as we proceed. But a general view of their nature and 
numbers may be given now. 

If I say / sofw these m^n^ or / sa/vo this men, there 
is a discord. This Toan and tfiese men are the true 
combinationB. Here we have a concord of Number. 


If I say 7 sees Johrij there is a discord in the way of 

If I say he is him, there is a discord of case. The 
true combination is ^ is ^. This gives us a concord 
of Case. 

If I say 7 cio this that I might gam by Uy or I did 
this that I might gava by it, this is a discoid. The 
right expression is either 7 did this that I might gain 
by it^ or 7 do this that I may gain by it. This gives 
us a concord of Tense. This is not generally recognized 
as a concord, but it evidently is one. 

§ 391. Apposition. — In expressions like Oeorgej 
King of England^ we must notice — 

1. That the words King and Oeorge are in the same 

2. That they denote the same object. The word 
Oeorge applied to that particular monarch means the 
same person as the King of England ; and the words 
King of England applied to the same monarch mean 
the same person as Oeorge. 

3. That they explain each other. If we say simply 
the Kin^ of En^gland^ we do not sufficiently explain 
ourselves ; since we may mean a Henry , an Edward^ 
or a WUliaTa. And if we say simply Oeorge^ we do not 
sufficiently explain ourselves ; since we may meaQ any 
person in the world whose name is Oeorge. But if we 
say Oeorge^ King of England, we explain what king 
and what Oeorge is meant. 

Words that thus explain each other, mean the same 
thing, and are in the same case, may be said to be 
placed alongside of each other, or to be in apposition. 
The Latin word appositio means putting by the side of 
The following are specimens of apposition : — Sdomotu, 
the son of David. — Cro&sus, Kvng of Lydia* — Content, 
the source of happiness. — John^s the farmen^s wife.-- 


Oliver's the apifs evidence. — Casaarj the Roman em- 
peror^ vnvadea Britai/n. — Here the words Roman emr- 
peror explain, or define, the word Cceaar ; and the sen- 
tence, filled up, might stand, Cceaar^ thai: is, the Roman 
em/peroTj &c. Again, the words Royrian empercyr 
might be wholly ejected ; or, if not ejected, they might 
be thrown into a parenthesis. The practical bearing 
of this fact is exhibited by changing the form of the 
sentence, and inserting the conjunction arid. In this 
case, instead of one person, two are spoken of, and the 
verb vnvadea must be changed from the singular to the 
plural. Now the words Roman em/peror are said to be 
in apposition to Cceaar. They constitute, not an addi- 
tional idea, but an explanation of the original one. 
They are, as it were, laid alongaide {appoaiti) of the 
word Cceaar. Cases of doubtful number, wherein two 
substantives precede a verb, and wherein it is uncer- 
tain whether the verb should be singular or plural, are 
decided by determining whether the substantives be in 
apposition or the contrary. No matter how many 
nouns there may be, so long as it can be shown that 
they are in apposition, the verb is in the singular nimi- 
ber, provided that the main noun is also singular. 

§ 392. Apposition is, manifestly, a Concord. Nor is 
it the last of them. The Concord between the Subject 
and the PredAcate^ though of less importance in English 
than in most other languages, requires notice. 

The Predicate invariably agrees with the Subject in 
Case ; and, as the Subject is always Nominative, the 
Predicate is Nominative also. There is no exception 
to this Concord: though there is no construction in 
which it is more disguised. It is only when the Sub- 
ject and Predicate are connected by the Verb ia^ or 
some allied word, that it is seen at once— Aa ia brave^ 
we are tired, they are aMierSj &c. 

416' CONCOBD. 

Here, although the Nominative Case has no proper 
sign, we see that brave^ tiredj and soldiers are in the 
same case as he, we, and they : and if we translated the 
sentences into Latin we should write iUe est fariis; 
no8 sumus fessi, illi sunt miUtes. Nor could we see 
how any other Case would be tolerable. The truth is 
that this Concord, like all the others, is a natural one ; 
indeed, it would not be a Concord if it were the 

But between knowing that this is the constructioo, 
and calling the process by its right name, there is a 
difference. That the Noun which follows the Substan- 
tive Verb as a Predicate is in the Nominative Case, 
and that the Subject is the same, we know. But the 
ordinary way in which we teach it is that it is a pro- 
cess of Oovermnent, Sometimes the formula is special; 
i.e. to the effect that Verbs Substantive govern a Nomi- 
native Case. Sometimes it is invested with something 
like generality, and becomes ' Verbs Svbstantive are 
followed by the Case by which they are preceded.^ Of 
course, when it is the Subject that precedes, its case is 
the Nominative. The fact is true enough : but the 
notion that it is an instance of Government is a mis- 

The origin of this error lies in the great extent to which Verbs are 
what we may caU a governing class. They are best represented by those 
of the Transitive division, and every one of these governs some case 
or other ; and that an Obliqne one. Other Verbs are supposed to do the 
same ; and the result is that such a genuine Concord as that of the Sub- 
ject and Predicate gets described as an instance of Oovemment; which 
is the reverse of Concord rather than a form of it 

§ 393. Oovemment. — Concord means what its name 
denotes ; agreement in certain points between any two 
words of which number, gender, &c., have been the 
chief. The effect of all concords is to keep such words 
in the same granmiatical place as they were. 

ooTBBKUEirr. 417 

Oovemmenb or Regvmen puts each word out of two 
in a differefrvt place. Thus in / strike him, while / is 
in the nominatiye case, and strike in the corresponding 
person, hi/ra is in the objective case, and, so being, 
agrees with neither of them. 

The chief fonns of govemment are : 

1. Government of a noun by a noun, as the fcUheT^s 

2. Grovemment of a noun by a verb, as / strike 

3. Govemment of a noun by a preposition, as the 
father of the son ; speak to me. 

4. Govemment of a verb by a conjunction or a 
relative pronoun, e.g. : 

He strikes me: — if he strike me, / shaU strike 

Hie mam who did this shaU die, whosoever he he—^ 
which is generally considered to be better grammar 
than the man who did this shaU die, whosoever he is. 

§ 394. Collocation. — ^The order or arrangement of 
the words of a sentence is in English a matter of more 
than ordinary importance ; and it is easy to see why it 
should be so. In languages, like the Latin, where the 
inflections are numerous, words like bonus domi/nus 
or pulchra fUa may be placed far apart from one 
another, and so may words like miUtes pugnant, or 
piieri ludMe, and thousands of others in similar cir- 
cumstances. This is because in the terminations -usy 
-a, we have certain outward and visible signs of gender, 
and these show that the words in which they occur 
agree with one another in that respect. And the same 
is the case with -es, ^i, -nt, and -ite, except that the 
agreement here is in the way of number, and it is 
number of which these syllables are the signs. But 

E X 


in Engliflb, where the adjectives have no signs of any- 
thing at all, or, in other words, no inflection, while the 
remaining parts of speech have but few, no snch latitude 
is admissible. Hence, words which agree with one 
another must, as a general rule, be kept in one another^s 

These are the three chief heads under which the 
great majority of the rules of syntax may be ar^ 
ranged. There are none of them of an abstruse char- 
acter ; indeed, the class of concords is so thoroughly a 
matter of common sense that, at the first view, it seems 
scarcely worth explanation ; for it is clear enough 
that in the concords of number, gender, case, and per- 
son, the two words in agreement are really two names 
of the ssone object, and such being the case, Tnuetj in 
both cases, be of the same gender, number, and the 
like. This is so simple a matter, that, at the first view, 
it appears that we want no granunarian to enlarge 
upon it. 

§ 395. Such would, doubtless, be the case if the 
concords, &c., stood alone, i.e., if there was nothing to 
disturb them. But this is not the case. The follow- 
ing is a notice, not of all, but only of some of these 
disturbing influences. They are well known and gene- 
rally recognised. They have been, to some extent, 
classified, and some of them have names — old names 
dating back to the classical time of Greek language ; 
and thus showing that they have belonged to granmiar 
ever since it was first cultivated. 

§ 396. EUipais. — Such a name is EUipsiSj signify- 
ing ' omission,' ^ deficiency,' or ^ falling short,' or < short 

This was bought at BundeU and Bridges, ie. shop, 'waiehouae^ or 
place of business. I am going to St, PauFs, i.e. cathedxaL 


§ 397. Pleona87ru — Such a name is Pleanaam, sig^ 
nifying excess. 

The Idng he is just. [ I saw her, the queen. 

The men tha/ were there. The king his crown. 

In the comparative degree we occasionally find, even 
in good writers, besides the syllable -er, the word 
TTiore ; as, the more aerener spi/rit Expressions like 
these are pleonastic, since the word more is a super- 

In the superlative degree we occasionally find, 
even in good writers, besides the syllable -ea^, the word 
most; as the moat atraitest aect. Expressions like 
these are pleonastic, since the word most is a super- 

§ 398. Peraonification, — Such a name is Personi- 
fication, of which the following are instances : 

Chid^ whoH touch seductive leads to crime. 
The eiiie$ who aspired to liberty. 

The unexceptionable forms for these two texts are : 1. 
gold, the touch of which, &c. ; 2. the cities which 
aspired, &c. 

Still the exceptionable texts can be explained, per- 
haps excused. We may say that a city is what it is on 
the strength of the human individuals that constitute 
it ; and we say Oold is treated as a personal agent, like 
Sin, Death, Virtue and Vice, &c. 

§ 399. ViokUions {real or apparent) of the con^ 
cord of number. — I have not travelled this twenty 
years. — As this is singular and twervty years plural, there 
is an apparent violation of the concord of number. 
Still, it is only apparent. The words twenty years may 
be considered to mean, not twenty separate years taken 
severally J but a number of years amounting to twenty 



dealt with as a single period. In this latter case the 
words twenty years, though plural in form, are singular 
in sense. 

These sort of people, — ^Here these is plural, and sort 
is singular ; so that there is a violation (real or appa- 
rent) of the concord of number. Still, as the word sort 
implies the existence of more persons than one, the ex- 
pression is open to the same kind of explanation as the 
preceding one. 

The reason of this confusion of number is clear. 
There are in all languages certain substantives called 
Collectives. Of these collectives the word siocperice is 
a good example. It involves two notions : (1) that of 
six separate pen/nies ; (2) that of six pem/rdes dealt 
with as a single sum. In the first case it is plural ; 
since in talking of six separaJte pennies we contemplate 
a plurality of parts. In the second case it is singular, 
since in talking of a single sum we lose sight of the 
plurality of parts, and contemplate only the unity of 
sum that results from them. In all collective sub- 
stantives there is a mixture of two notions. Army, 
parUamentj people, mob, gang, set, family, &c., are 

By remembering that in all languages there is a 
tendency to personify, we can explain many apparent 
violations of the concord of gender. 

By remembering that in all languages there is a 
certain number of collective substantives, we can ex- 
plain many apparent violations of the concord of 

§ 400. Attraction. — This is a word with rather a 
wide sense ; but, in the present work, it will be confined 
to a disturbing influence limited to Complex sentences, 
and, even in them, unless there is a notable amount of 
well marked Cases, of no great importance. Of the 


few questions, however, connected with it some are 
found even in so uninflected a language as the English. 

It is only in Complex sentences that they occur : 
and of these, only in those in which there is a Bela- 
tive and an Antecedent. 

Of the Antecedent the Eelative is, of course, only 
another name ; i.e. in phrases like / saw the man 
whom you spoke of, the word whom applies to the same 
person as man. Now the Antecedent and Belative, 
though they necessarily agree in both Number and 
Gender, may either agree or disagree in Case : for we 
may say — 

1. John, who trusts me, comes here ; 

2. John, whom I trust, comes here ; 

3. John, whose trust is in me, comes here. 

It is not uncommon that when there are two Verbs — one in the Ante- 
cedent clause and the other in the Kelative — they may govern different 
cases ; and if there were no disturbing cause, Uiey would do so as a 
matter of course. But the Relative and the Antecedent refer to the 
same olgect ; and this has a tendency to create disturbance. In / use 
the books (whieh) Ipossesst there is, in English, no danger ; inasmuch 
as use and poeeeas govern the same Case : and if they did not, it would 
not matter, for, except the Possessive, all the Oblique Cases are alike. 
But, in Greek, use (xp^M^) governs a Dative, possess (fx*^) &Q Accu- 
sative. In fact, however, they both govern the same Case — XP^I""^ 
fitfixiois olf Hx^' Here oU=stDhiehf and is governed by Ix^* is said to 
be attracted to the case governed by xp^f""* ^^^ ^t tiiat the Belative 
applies to the same object as the Antecedent is the natural ezplanatiou 
<^ this daas of anomalies. 




§ 401. The special details of English Syntax now 
come under notice. They will be arranged according 
to the several ' Parts of Speech ; ' these being deter- 
mined by the place a word takes in a Proposition. 

§ 402. Syntax of the Pronoun. — A Pronoun is a 
Variable, or Convertible name ; and can, by itself , con- 
stitute either the Subject or the Predicate of a Propo- 
sition ; as / am he, this is John, what is thai ? It 
agrees with the Substantive in this respect, but diflfers 
from it in being Convertible or Variable. 

We have seen that as the FronotiDS had the fuller inflection, thej 
preceded both the substantive and the adjective in Etymology. For 
the same reason they vriU precede them in Syntax. Whether wc say 
feed the horse or the horse feeds is indifferent ; inasmuch as, in suhstan- 
iives like horse, there is no difference between the objective and nomina- 
tive. Whether we say a good book or good books is indifierent ; inas- 
much as in adjectives like good there is no difference between the plural 
and the singular. Whether we say feed he or feed him is by no means 
indifferent ; inasmuch as in pronouns like he, &c., the objective and tho 
nominative cases differ in form. 

A Pronoun can constitute either the Subject or the Predicate of a 
Proposition. But some do this more decidedly than others. With 
words like who, what, this, these, that, those, I, thou, we, and the like, 
their power is plain and clear ; and they form Substantives, not in re- 
spect to the place they take in a proposition, but in respect to the prin- 
ciple upon which they do so. The Substantive, as a Name, is Invariable, 
the Pronoun Variable. 

But tlie aforesaid words which so decidedly share the nature of sub- 
Ftantives, are not the only Pronouns. There are, besides, such words as 
jiome, any, many, of which the character is adjectival rather than sub- 
Ktnntival. Still, they can form terms ; and that by themselves. At the 
Bame time they are often accompanied by a substantive, and, in some 
cases, almost require one. In expressions like some are here, any tnU 
do, many are called, &c., the substantive, to which they are the oquiTa* 


lent, can geneially be inserted with adyantage ; so that we may say, 
mma nten, any instrument^ many individuals. All the pronouns of this 
class are nndeclined. The nearest approaches to an exception to the 
f(»^going statement are supplied by the word same, and the Ordinal 
Numbers ; which, instead of standing quite alone, are generally pre- 
ceded by the definite article, so that we say the same^ the first, &c. 
Here, however, the article is to be looked on as part of the pronoun. 
For a further elucidation of this, as well as for the nature of the article 
itself, see below. 

§ 403. Pleonasm. — Pleonasm occurs with Pronouns 
in expressions like — 

1. The king, he is just. 

2. I saw her, the queen. 

3. The men, they were there. 

4. The king, his crown. 

Mars his sword. 
Nor Neptune's trident, nor Apollo's bow. 

Ben Jonson: Cynthia^s Bevels, i. 1. 

Pallas i^ glass. 

Bacon : Advancement of Learning, 278. 

The Count his galleys. 

Twelfth Night, iii. 3. 26. 

Mars his true moving. 

1 Henry VL i. 2. 1. 

Charles his gleeks. 

1 Henry VL iii. 2. 123. 

Abbott: Shakespearian Grammar, § 217. 

§ 404. / a/nd me as Predicates. — ^7 is so undouht- 
edly the Nominative Case of the Pronoun of the First 
Person, and the rule that the Predicate is in the same 
Case as the Subject is so absolute, that the correctness 
of such a sentence sa ' It is I^ v& absolutely imimpeach- 


We know, however, that a great deal has been written 
about it. And something will be written now. Not, 
however, with the view of impugning the general opinion 
as to its propriety, but with that of ascertaining how far 
it is the (ynJy proper form. Does it exclude the combi- 

«&> £i tit^ ? Toi*^ sis^iBsr 2 £ ^ X. BaK. as die SqV 

j«i: sad C^cula iz? i3X2i5*f£ sl «ae TiescasB. it maj be 

Ci3CT?T»d s^ini'^si^^'vrnriZ. CsLgvie^asediBitead? 

I* 3§ cerarr-. as a jmcaa -^ ftec^ tioc is i# » used; 

^"^ JIf if sn: iott cBKOees FxcBdi. On 

k tiie ocij t.:rleciaed exgcssasa^ 

f 40k5l Jfy oai JKm— IKjr ffbi liime^—Ot these 
tiie £:cxES in -^ are <£iT vaed vsieA t^ snfastantiTe to 
wldch tiKT lefier is <MjfiHtfWiwi; as iii# £# «iy boot; 
wbUfr thoee in -« aze onlr ORd v^ea die sahttantiTe is 
andezstocd ; a^^ tkis boai w wkime^ 

What ^qppties to diese tvo fixBS of the 

ProcKffxn of die Fxzst asd Second Peisoiis, Sinffular, 
ending in -r, ^ipliesy aboc to those of the (so-called) 
Third Peraon, and die Fbzzal forms in genenl — her-e^ 
aur'€j yaur^ tkeir-^ 

This is a discovery of Sir leaac Xncions is diffe- 
rent in sense from tkis is a discovery of Sir Isaac 
NewUnu The latter means this is hoy: Sir Isaac New- 
ten vras discovered: the former means of Sir Isaac 
Keuion's discoveries this is one* 

In all each sentences there are tfco substantives : 
cue with which the article agrees, and which is ex- 
pressed ; and one by which the possessiTe case s is go- 
Temed, and which is omitted, as bdng understood. 

The pronominal possessive cases, my, thyj &c^ are 
not in all respects like the possessive cases of the sub- 
stantives {fathers, mother^Sy 4c) 

We cannot say an enemy of my — » a notion of 
iky — , &c. Yet — 

We can say these are good bookSj but we cannot, 
now, say these are mine books. Hence — 


Rule I. — ^The adjectival pronouns like mme, thi/iie^ 
curSj &c, are only used when the substantive is under^ 
stood ; as this book is mvne^ i.e. my book. 

Mule 2. — ^The possessive cases are only used when 
the substantive is eoqpreaaed ; as this is my book (not 
this is mine book, nor yet this book is my). 

§ 406. Yov, and Ye. — As far as the practice of the 
present speech goes, the word you is Nominative : since 
we say you move, you were speakmg, &c. Why should 
it not be treated as such ? There is — 

Afi I have made ye one, lords, one remain ; 
So I go stronger you more honour gain. 

Henry VUI. iv. 2. 

What gain you by forbidding it to teaze ye^ 
It now can neither trouble you nor please ye, 


§ 407. Thou and You. — ^When we say you instead 
of thou, it is doubtful whether, in strict language, this 
is a point of Grammar. I imagine that in addressing 
the person spoken to, the courtesy consists in treating 
him as something more than a single individual. This 
is the Proruymen reverentice. Akin to it is — 

The DoLti/ou8 Ethicua ; as in Rob me the Exchequer. 
Here the me^for me, for my sake, at my request 

Your serpent of Egypt is lord now of your mud by the operation of 

your sun ; so is your crocodile. 

Antony and Cleopatra, iL 7, 29. 

I would teach these nineteen the special rules ; as your punto, your 
rorerso, your stoccata, your imbroccato, your passada, your montanto. 

BdbadU, in Every Man in his Humour, iv. 6. 

Abbott: Shakespearian Grammar , § 221. 

See also §§ 231-236 for an elaborate exposition of 
Shakespear's use of thou and you, &c. 

§ 408. Hjfi and Her. — ^These are Possessive, and 
eorregpond with the Latin ejus. They at^ ouot 


Adjectives, and they by no means correspond with the 
Latin auua^ sua^ suum. 

§ 409. Tlie Reflective construction. — The true Ee- 
flective=the Latin ae is wanting in the present Eng- 
lish : the word self being used in its stead. Neverthe- 
less, it does not wholly exclude the simple pronoun. 
We may say / strike me or thou strihest thee, and that 
without ambiguity. He strikes Aim, however, is am- 
biguous, as him may be either the speaker and striker 
or some one else. 

§ 410. The reflective pronoun, in "English, folknvs 
tiiQ governing verb : also — 

In the Imperative Mood the simple Pronoun fol- 
lows it. 

Hence, when the word self is omitted the construc- 
tion is ambiguous. Mount ye may mean either be 
mounted or mxmnt yourselves. 

§ 411. This and that. — When these two Demonstpativea, Trhich con- 
Toy the notion of comparative nearness and distance, follow two nouns 
with which they coincide, the current rule is that this refers to the latter, 
and that to the former. The most familiar example is the following — 
in Latin and in verse — ^vorse being by no means the best quarter for 
rules of Collocation : — 

Quocunque aspicias nihil est nisi pontus et aer : 
Nubibus hie tumidus, fluctubus ille minaz. 

I hold this to be wholly artificial— in English at least I thought, or 
felt» even when I was first taught it as a school-boy, that it was repug- 
nant to such previous notions as either instinct or imitation had im- 
planted in me ; and I think so now. We can see which is which in the 
extract before us from what we know of the properties of the ocean and 
the atmosphere ; and in such a passage as — 

'Alexander and GaBsar wore the great heroes of antiquity — this a 
Roman, that a Oreek.' 

We could arrive at the same conclusion from our information 

But if any one said to us — 

*He sent me the balance in ducats and doubloons. These I got 
changed hj Mr. A, and those by Mr. B,' 


I doubt irhether any one would feel any assnniioe as to which of the 
two sorts of coin Messrs. A and B^ respectively, changed. 

If he were inclined to consider the matter, and tried to make ont 
what the collocation ought to mean, he wonld, perhaps, take such a pair 
of words as the one and the other, or the Jirst and the second ; or he 
might call this the Pronoun of comparatiye neameea Number 1, and that 
the Pronoun of comparative distance Number 2. If so, the result would 
be in direct opposition to the rule. 

The fact is that in cases of this kind there are two ways of measnr- 
ing what we call logical distance : and it is possible that one person 
may think in one way and another in the other. One may measure 
distance from the end of the previous clause, and, conducting his dis- 
course in a straight line, consider the last word he has heard as the 
nearest. Another may think of the two clauses as parallels; in which 
case the first word of the previous clause is the nearest. It is difficult, 
however, for one person to say how another thinks in matters of this 
kind, and not very easy to say how he thinks himself. 

Still, one point I hold to be certain; viz., that the question is 
not one of (Grammar. Grammar can never teU us how we ought to think 
in such a matter as this. It can only tell us how to express such thoughts 
as we have. 

And it is for the sake of drawing this distinction that I have enLuged 
upon an apparently unimportant point. There are other questions be- 
sides this wherein, until we know how the speaker thinks, it is not in the 
province of the grammarian to say how he should either speak or 
write. The present is one of these ex^ra-grammatical questions, and, 
in my mind, the more perplexing one as to use of *tnU* and * shall* 
is another of them. 

§ 412. Ths Indetermmate Pronoun — ^one says J 
— ^DiflFerent languages have diflferent modes of express- 
ing indeterminate propositions. In Greek, Latin, and 
English the passive voice is used — XFyeroi, didtur, it 
is said. The Italian uses the reflective pronoun ; as, 
si dice=it says itself. Sometimes the plural pronoim 
of the third person is used. Thus, in our language, 
they say^the world at large says. Finally, rruin has 
an indeterminate sense in the Modem German; as, 
rria/ti sagt = ma/n says &= they say. The same word 
was also used indeterminately in the Old, although it 
is not 80 used in the Modem, Eng\i«\i. liLVXy&Qi\dL 


English the -n was occasionally lost, and man or Tnen 
became 7ne. In the present English it is onej as in 
one says. The present writer, as others have done 
before him, believes that this is, word for word, the 
French oniaon dU. But, as this was in Old French 
honiTne, and, in Latin, homo^ meaning for meaning, the 
import of the three combinations is the same in the 
three languages. Whether what applies to the parti- 
cular phrase one says applies to the forms in -8, as in 
one'« own, or my wife and little ones, indeed, whether 
it applies to any second combination in oiur language is 
another question. Individually, I have given the doc- 
trine that on=:m;an a far wider application than I do 
at present. But that one says, even if it stand alone, 
is a Grallicism, and that the element one is Tiot the 
Nimieral, is, in my mind, the true explanation of the 

There are few questions for which the nature of the 
appropriate evidence is clearer. Instances of any form 
of the word one {avas, em, or eri) being used with the 
power of the on in on dit, and in the place of Tnan in 
man aagt, in any of the German languages not aflFected 
by French influences, would be to the purpose : and in- 
stances of the Numeral one used anyivhere in the sense 
of everyone, would be to the purpose also. But e\'i- 
dence to its use as some one, or som^ man, or vice 
verad, is not to the purpose. 

§ 413. '/r and ' ThereJ* — ^Two other pronouns, or, 
to speak more in accordance with the present habit of 
the English language, one pronoim, and one adverb of 
pronominal origin, are also used indeterminately, \'iz., 
it and there. 

It can be either the Subject or the Predicate of a 
sentence, — it is this — this is it — / am it — it is L 
When it is the Subject of a proposition, the verb neoes- 

*jr' AKD ^ there! 429 

sarily agrees with it, and can be of the singular number 
only ; no matter what be the number of the Predicate 
—rit is this — it is these. When it is the Predicate of a 
proposition, the number of the verb depends upon the 
number of the Subject. 

^Therc^ can only be the Predicate of a propo- 
sition; differing in this respect &om it Hence, it 
never affects the number of the verb ; which is deter- 
mined by the nature of the Subject — there is a man^ 
&c. — there are men^ &c. 

But this applies only to the word there when it is 
indefinite, or indeterminate. Wliere it is definite, or 
determinate, it is still a Predicate; but it is in its 
proper place as such, i.e. at the evid of the proposition. 
Even here it can be transposed. 


Ind^nite, or Indeterminate, 

There is Bometliing in the way. 

There is no one here. 

There are thieves in the house. 

D^nite, or Determinate, 

Some one is concealed there. 
The thieves are there. 
Yon will find them there, 

Or^ transposed. 
There yon wiU find them. 

Ind^mte and D^nite in the same proposition. 
There is some one there. 

§ 414. In such phrases as it rainSj it freezes, <Scc., 
it is difficult to say in express terms what it stands for. 
Suppose we are a^ed what rains ? or what freezes — 
the answer is difficult. We might say the rain, the 
weather^ the sky^ or what not? Yet, iioi[i^ ol MXi^^ 


*/r' AND ^THERE.^ 

answers axe satisfactory. To say the rain ramsj iks 
sky rainSj &c., sounds strange. Yet we all know the 
meaning of the expression— obscure as it may be in its 
details. We all know that the word it is essential to 
the sentence; and that if we omitted it and simply 
said rams, the grammar would be £Ekulty. We also 
know that it is the subject of the proposition. 

A curious way of giving precision to this indefi- 
nite power of the word it is seen in the following 
list: — 



Dens mens. 



tt tuns. 



tt sans. 



„ ipsioB. 



„ sanctus. 



„ omnipotenfl, 



„ Creator. 

§ 415. '/r may follow an mtransitive verb. It 
does this in colloquial phrases, ss go it: in. which it, 
manifestly, is not in that definite state of regimen, 
or government, that it is when it follows a transitive 
verb ; as in take it, keep it, &c. 

Oo it here is, undoubtedly, a verb. In the follow- 
ing instances it is not so much a verb as a substantive 
with the import of a verb. 

It is often added to nouns or words tliat are not generally used as 
verbs, in order to give them the force of verbs. 

Foot it,— Tempest, i. 2, 880. 
To queen iL—Henry VZU. ii. 3, 87. 
To prince U, — CynMine, iii. 4, 86. 
Lord Angelo dukes it well. 

Measure for Measure, iii. 2, 100. 

and later — 

Whether the channer tinner it or saint it, 
If folly grows romantic I must paint it. 

Bope : Moral Essays, iL ] 5. 
MboU: Shakespearian Grammar ^ § 22({. 


So &r as this construction is explicable, it must be 
explained by supposing that it means something done in 
the way of going, i.e. of performing mthfeet (as dancing 
is performed) — of doing after the manner of a queen, a 
pri/nce, a sinner, or a saint, and the like. 

§ 416. In / strike me, the verb strike is transitive. 
In / fear me, the verb fear is intransitive or neuter ; 
unless indeed fear mean terrify — ^which it does not. 
So also we repent us and others. Here, after a neuter 
or intransitive verb, the reflective pronoun appears out 
of place, or as an expletive. 

§ 417. We may now pause upon the fiwt of our 
having in the present English no true Eeflective like 
the Latin se, the German sick, and the Scandinavian 
sik or sig — a remarkable deficiency ; with which the 
absence of such an Adjective as suu^, the German sei/n, 
or the Scandinavian sin is connected. This forces upon 
us such constructions as his mother and her mother : 
where the pronoim is the Possessive Case, and no con- 
cord of Gender is required. It gives prominence to 
the word self in myself, thyself. It makes such a 
reflective verb as se battre, sich scJdagen, kaUe sig, in 
French, German, and the Scandinavian languages, to 
say the least, improbable. Indeed, in a larger work 
more could be said upon the effects of its absence, than 
upon those of its presence. In Beowulf we get in the 
adjective sin just a trace of it. 

This 18 why I have said that the deyelopment of a Passive Voice, like 
that of the Scandinavian languages, is, in English, improbable zather 
than impossible. The vords husk and Ixuk have been treated as Be- 
flective forms, after the Korse pattern ; and, as such, due to ' None in- 
fiuenees* Their elements are held to bua + 8ik^to make oneeeif ready ^ 
and bak + eiksmto bake oneself. This may, or may not, be the case. 
But, even if it be, there is no reason to refer them to contact with 
Norsemen, to long as the original reflective is a probable element in. tJbb 
oldor AogloMzoiu 


Bat there is more in the matter than this. The Beflectiye Bronoim 
may lend itself to two processes in two different stages of a language : 
and, before it has developed a Fassiye Voice, may have developed a 
series of forms of a Deponent, rather than a Passive, character. If so 
it is possible that the r (which represents an earlier -«) in the Scandi- 
navian Singular for all the persons of the Present Tense may have been 
originally the -s of the Beflective Pronoun : and "what -r is in Scandina- 
vian, -^ may have been in the Northumbrian. That there are notable ob- 
jections to this on the surface I am well aware. But the Norse -r, and 
the Northumbrian s, give us little more than a conflict of difScoltieft. 
I have, therefore, not assumed the suggested doctrine to the extent 
of building a smgle argument upon it ; and I scarcely Tentoie to call 
it an hypothesis. But that there is much that can be found in favour 
of it I am sure. The limitation of the -r to the singular number in 
the Norso is the chief objection ; and I prefer to recognize the fact of 
its being so, rather than to explain it away. 

§ 418. 

A Substantive is an Invariable, or InconvertibK 
name ; and it can, by itself, constitute either the Sub- 
ject or the Predicate of a Proposition — as av/mm^r is 
coming, this is gold. It is by this invariability, or in- 
convertibility, that it dififers from the Pronoun, 

§ 419. The real Syntax of the Substantive lies 
within its own division. One Substantive may govern 
another. This gives us the old rule that when two 
substantives come together the latter is put in the 
Genitive (Possessive) Case — as 

The man's hat. 
The father's son. 

The Collocation here gives us one of the few absolutely 
imexceptionable rules of our language. The Genitive, 
or Possessive, never follows, but always precedes the 
case by which it is governed. 

§ 420. Ellipsis and Pleonasm. — To Ellipsis belong 
such combinations as *St. Paul's,' *Eundell and Bridge's,' 
and others. They are common in other languages; 


and, generally, the words understood are the same 
throughout. Those connected with the idea of hxmae^ 
OT family J are the conunonest. In Latin ubi ad Dianas 
ve7ieri8=i(Bdem DiancB. In Greek 'Stj\iifs K6Bpov= 
KoBpov vlos (jBon). 

Of Pleonasm the most familiar instances are those 
where, besides the Substantive, there is a superadded 
and a superfluous Pronoun ; as 

The king he is jttst. 

My banks they are fumishedy &c. 

The Possessive form his, where thus used, has a 
fictitious importance, because, out of the contraction of 
8uch pleonasms as Mara his swordj the Count his 
galleys, and the like, the doctrine that the -8 in his 
is the ^ of the Genitive case has originated ; indeed 
it is possible that some may believe it at the present 
moment. See Abbott, (£c., § 217; and Morris, &c», 
§ 100, with note. 

§ 421. 

An Adjective is a word which, by itself, can form a 

But it can form only one of the two terms of a 
Proposition. It can form the Predicate ; but it can 
not form the Sviject. 

This is because it is not a name ; at least, not in 
the same way that Substantives and Pronouns are. 

It is a word which suggests a Name; rather than 
the Name itself. 

This name is the corresponding Abstract term — as 
red, red-ness, &c. 

§ 422. The chief points in the Syntax of the Ad- 
jective are those connected with the Degrees of Com- 

F F 


When two objects are compared, the Comparatiye, 
when more than two, the Superlative Degree, should be 
used — this is the better of the two, but this is the best 
of all. 

The Positive preceded by the word more may stand 
instead of the Comparative. Wo may say more wise, 
instead of wiser. 

The Positive preceded by the word most may stand 
instead of the Superlative. We may say Tnost wise in- 
stead of wisest 

That they can be used is universally known. Neither 
is there anything remarkable in their syntax. Common 
sense tells us what they mean. When, however, do we 
use the one form, when the other ? This depends upon 
the nature of the Adjective. In general terms, we m»iy 
say that the object of the circumlocution is to keep the 
length of the word within certain limits. It is, pro- 
bably, better to say more fruitful than fruitfuller. 
It is certai/rUy better to say more pusillanimous than 
pusillanimouser. But it is doubtful whether this is 
the only rule to go by. A great many Adjectives 
(fruitful amongst the number) are Compounds, in 
which case the addition of an extra syllable presents an 
accumulation of subordinate parts, which, to some 
speakers, may be inconvenient or disagreeable. Thirdly, 
there is a large number of Adjectives whicli are of 
foreign origin. To some of these an English affix -er 
or -68^ would be exceptionable. 

Thus much, however, may safely be said — 

1. That when the word is, at one and the same 
time, monosyllabic in form and English in origin, the 
forms in -er and -est are the proper ones. 

2. That when the word is trisyllabic, compound, 
and of foreign origin, the combinations in TTiore and 
most are to be resorted to. 


For intermediate cases the writer may consult his 
own taste. Of dissyllables, the words that end in -i/ 
are those that, next to our native monosyllables, have 
the best claim to be inflected — as holy, holier, holiest 
— ma/nly, manlier, manliest ; upon which we may re- 
mark, by the way, that they are all Anglosaxon. 

§ 423. The adjective like governs a case, and it is, 
at present, the only adjective that does so. When we 
say this is good for John, the government proceeds not 
from the adjective good, but from the preposition for. 
The word like, however, really governs a case. 

§ 424. Pleonasm. — This we find in expressions 
like the Tnore serener spirit; the most straitest 

§ 425. The extent to which the Adjective of 
the present time stands in contrast to the Adjective of 
the earlier stages of oiu: language has already been 
explained. It is now as iminflected as an Adverb. 
Hence, so far as the outer form of an Adjective 
in Concord with its Substantive is concerned, error 
or confusion is impossible : for in the Adjective there 
is no distinction of either Gender or Number. Still, 
such distinctions have existed; and of these one, at 
least, claims attention. 

That Adjectives in the Neuter Gender may be used 
Adverbially is a familiar rule in Greek and Latin, as 
well as in English ; and when we say the sun shines 
bright, the tims flies fast, the snail moves slow, we use 
not only an Adjective, but an Adjective in the ]N enter 
Gender. It has, at present, no outward or visible sign 
of its Neutrality. Virtually, however, it is as real a 
Neuter as if it had ; for when the Genders of the Ad- 
jectives were distinguished from one another by inflec- 
tions, the sign of the Neuter was the sign of the Adjec- 
tive when used as an Adverb. 



In the examples just given we may write for brightj 
fast^ alow^ and the like, brightly^ fcLstly, slowly, &c., 
and in the eyes of some these are the better words. 
However, we have a choice between the two. When 
the Adjective itself ends in -iy we have no such choice. 
We cannot well derive such a word as daUyly from 
daily : but must use such phrases as he labours daily , 
he sleeps nightly, he watches hourly, and others ; in 
all of which the simple Adjective is used as an 

In the way of Collocation (which is independent of 
inflection) the Adjective precedes the Substantive; 
though not so regularly as the Possessive Case (maiCs 
hat<i &c.) precedes it. 

For rhetorical purposes the Adjective and the 
Substantive (or Pronoun), as the terms of a proposi- 
tion, may change places — as Great is Diana, of the 
Ephesians. Here the Adjective great is by no means 
the Subject ; nor is Diana the Predicate. There is 
only a transposition of the terms. 

§ 426. 
The Article. 

The proper place of the Article is with the Adverb, 
Preposition, and Conjunction, or those Parts of Speech 
which can form only portions of a term, rather than 
with the Noun and Verb, which can, by themselves and 
single-handed, form whole terms. Its manifest connec- 
tion, however, with the Pronoun, and the closeness of 
its relations to the Substantive, make it convenient to 
arrange it with the Nouns. 

The recognised Articles in English are the and an ; 
and it is, perhaps, not necessary to add to the Number. 
Nevertheless, it will soon be shown that there are other 
words which, if not actual Articles, are what we may 



call /Su6articalar in character. No is one of these ; and 
every is another. Neither of these words has any inde- 
pendent existence, except when coupled with substan- 
tive or pronoun. We can say every man or every one ; 
and we can say no rnan or no one ; but we cannot say 
every for every one, and we cannot use no as we use none, 
or not one, 

§ 427. When two or more substantives, following 
each other, denote the same object, the article precedes 
the first only. Thus we say, the secretary and treor- 
surer, when the two ofl&ces are held by one person. 
When two or more substantives following each other 
denote dififerent objects, the article is repeated, and pre- 
cedes each. We say the (or a) aecretain/ and the (or a) 
treasurer, when the two oflBces are held by different 
persons. This rule is much neglected. 

§ 428. Before a consonant, an becomes a ; as an 
axe, a man. In adder, which is properly nadder, and 
in nag, which is properly ag, there is a misdivieion (a 
nag for an ag, an adder for a nadder). So, also, in 
the old glossaries. 

Hec auris 
hec aquila 
hec anguiUa 
hec erinaceits 
hie comes 
hie seniar 
Me exul 
hie luirieiui 
hec aiba 
hec amietue 
hec eeeuria 
hec axis 
hec ancora 

a 91 ere 
a neggle 
a nele 
a »urchon 
a fierle 
a ntdd man 
a nowtlaj 
a fiotyre 
a nawbe 
a namjt 
a Tiax 
a waxyltre 
a nankyre 

I.e. an ear. 

— an eagle. 

— an eel. 

— an urchin. 

— an earl. 

— an old man. 

— an outlaw. 

— an otter. 

— an aube. 

— an amice. 

— an axe. 

— an axletrce. 

— an anchor. 

§ 429. The construction of the pronouns my, thy^ 
her, QfWTy your, and their is, in respect to their 

438 ^my' and ^mine.^ 

Syntax, in the same predicament with no^ every, and the 
Articles. We cannot use them as ordinary Possessive 
Cases, or as Adjectives, except in combination with a 
Noun — we can say these are good books, these are JohrCs 
books, these are my books, and, so far, Tny comports 
itself like a Possessive Case or an Adjective. But in 
phrases like these books are good, and these books are 
John^s, we must use mine rather than my ; i.e. we can 
say these books are mine, but not these books are my. 
Though we need not go so far as to call my, thy, and 
the like. Articles, we shall do well in attending to 
the Articular, or Subarticular, character of their 

Indeed, the Articular construction itself is that of 
Inflection rather than a separate word. Except when 
emphatic the Articles are wholly unaccented. In the 
Norse we have seen them absolutely incorporated with 
their Substantives ; and in the Fin languages and in 
the Ossete we find a similar incorporation of the 
Possessive Pronoun. If these latter may be termed 
subaHicvXar, the Articles themselves are subiaflec- 

§ 430. From the Syntax of the words my, thy, 
her, our, your, and their, we pass to that of the words 
Tnine, thine, hers, ours, yours, and theirs. These are 
used just where my, &c., is Twt used ; i.e. we say this 
hook is mine, &c., but not this is mine book. 

The history of this change is a long one. For the 
use of Tnine where we now use my, the reader i? 
referred to Abbott, &c., § 237. The investigation, how- 
ever, of the exact nature of the difference between the 
two combinations is important. The vowel, or diph- 
thongal forms, my, thy, &c., are used when the Pronoun 
is jpart of a term — Subject or Predicate as the case may 
be. The form in -n, as mine, thine, &c., is used chiefly 

*lfr' AND ^MINE.^ 439 

in the Predicate ; in which case it is separated from 
its Substantive by the copula. 

In the first case the form is Subarticulavy in the 
latter Predicative. 

When the Pronoun under notice constitutes the 
whole term, the noun i^ supplied from the context ; and 
this book is 7nine=thi8 book is my book. 

When constituting the part of a Predicate, jind 
preceded by the preposition o/, the noun is also sup- 
plied by the context. But, in this case, it is not neces- 
sary that the noim supplied by the context should be 
exactly the one that the context gives us by name. 
Thus in this book is one of minCy it is not necessary 
that book is the special name understood. Book^ un- 
doubtedly, is the special object under notice. But it is 
only one of a class. Hence ons of mine may mean 
one of my articles of propeHy. Whether, when a man 
who has only one book would say this is a book of mine 
is another question. But we can imagine cases where 
he would do so. He may be claiming other articles 
besides ; and then mvae means cme of m/y possessions, 
one of the missing articles^ or what not ? 

§ 431. ^ Horse of JacksorCs.^ — As compared with 
JcuksorCs horse, this, as the Possessive Case of a Sub- 
stantive, is exactly in the relation of a book of mine to 
my book ; i.e. its construction is Predicative and Ellip- 
tic, rather than Subarticular. 

§ 432. This is, apparently, a refinement. But it is 
an excusable, and indeed a necessary, one. I have 
written about Jackson's horse from memory ; because, 
in one of numerous discussions as to the import of the 
letter -8, 1 have heard it actually urged as an argument 
against the present interpretation that Jackson had, or 
might have had, only one horse. 

The answer to this is easier shown in Latin than in 

440 ^THia OF yours! 

English. The horse was not so much equua e Jackaoni 
equisy but equua e Jackaoniania ; i.e. Jackson's chattels 
in general. 

This is the answer for those who may care to give 
one. The better answer, however, is that the actual 
number of Jackson's horses is an extra-grammatical 

Again, this seems either over-refinement or useless 
wrangling ; for the argument from Jackson's stable I 
did not find in high quarters. But the suggestion that 
though a * Caatls of the Duke of NorthumberlaTid/s^ 
might be good grammar in speaking of ducal domains, 
whereon the castles might be numerous, it was not 
above suspicion when applied to the residence of the 
owner of a single domicile, may be found in a paper of 
no less a philologue than the late Archdeacon Hare ; 
and I think that in the following extract there is some- 
thing dangerously akin to the same doctrine : — 

' Uiis of yours is now, as in E. E. (Early English), generally applied 
to one out of a class, whether the class exist or be imaginaiy. We 
could say " this coat of yours," but not (except coUoquially) " this head 
of yours." It is, however, commonly used in Shakespeare, where even 
the conception of a class is impossible. 

Nor scar that whiter skin of hers than snow. 

Otheilo, V. 2, 4. 

Will not a calf-skin stop that month of thine f 

King John, iii. 1. 299.' 

Abbott: Shakespearian Grammar^ § 339. 

Here I diflfer unwillingly from Mr. Abbott so far 
as he considers that in the combinations this head of 
yours^ that whiter akin of youra, that mouth of thine^ 
there is no notion of a claaa. On the contrary, I hold 
that the class is a real one ; though it does not imply 
that the person addressed had more heada^ akiiia^ or 
moutha than one. The class to which the heada, &c., 


belong, are those of the*world at large ; and thi/ne and 
yours, &c., mean that the person addressed is the pos- 
sessor of the particular one spoken about. 

It seems to me that the preposition of always im- 
plies a class, or, if not a class in the ordinary sense of 
the term, a part of a whole of some kind. But this 
class, or whole, is equivocal in respect to its constitu- 
tion. A head, a skin, or a mouth are parts of the at- 
tributes, qualities, possessions, or whatever we choose 
to call them, of the object spoken about ; i.e. they are 
his, inter alia, the other contents being heterogeneous. 
On the other hand, however, they belong to a homo- 
geneous class of the same sort of objects found else- 
where ; one of which is specially noticed as being mine, 
thine, his, or hers, &c. Between these two, in the 
import of the word o/(for this is the one upon which the 
notion of a class of any kind hinges) there is unsteadiness 
and ambiguity. That a head of mine would imply that 
I had a second head I admit. But this is a difference 
between the import of the Definite and Indefinite Article. 
Hence, in our criticism, the double character of the class, 
and different powers of the two Articles, must be remem- 
)>ered. The construction, at any rate, is clear. The Pre- 
position of governs the name of the class ; one which is 
not apparent in the clause, but one which is understood 
or supplied ; whilst it is tliis imderstood, or supplied. 
Noun which governs the case in -«. 

§ 433. The origin of these explanations lies in a 
fact which, from being practically unimportant in so 
uninflected a language as the English, has been either 
overlooked or ignored ; viz., the Concord between the 
Subject and the Predicate. That it is not a case of 
Government is stated in § 392. This is the real meaning 
of the rule that the Verb Substantive (with others akin 
to it) governs the Noun that follows theixi m Wv^ ^iaxsi<& 


case as that of the Noun which precedes them. The 
Latin, from which language the rule seems to have been 
taken, best illustrates what the CJoncord really is. 

It is a Concord of Case — I am Johnssmim Jo- 

It is Tiot a Concord of Number — mdmera totus erat. 

It is not a Concord of Gender — triate lupus atabidis 
=a wolf is a bad (thing) for the folds, 

[n this last instance the Predicate speaks of the 
Subject as a member of a class ; and it is the Gender 
of the name of that class which determines the Gender 
of the Predicate — and this is naturally, in most cases, 
the Neuter. 

§ 434. The Case Absolute. — Nouns standing abso- 
lutely are of two sorts: (1) Those originating in an 
Accusative ; (2) those originating in a Dative, case. 

In expressing distance or duration^ either in time 
or spoAX^ we use the noun absolutely ; as he walked ten 
miles (i.e. the spaxie of ten rniles) ; he stood three 
hours (i.e. the space of three hours). Here the words 
stood and walk are intransitive ; so that it is not by 
them that the words miles and hours are governed. 
They are virtually Accusatives. 

In sentences like the door being open, the steed 
was stoUn — the sun having arisen^ the labourers pro- 
ceeded to work, the construction is dififerent. 

In the Substantives^ where there is no distinction 
between the nominative and the objective cases, it is of 
no practical importance to inquire as to the particular 
case in which the words like door and sun stand. In 
the Pronouns^ however, where there is a distinction 
between the nominative and objective cases, this inquiry 
must be made. 

1. He Tnade the best proverbs of any one, him only 


2. He made the best proverbs of any one, he only 

Which of these two expressions is correct ? This 
we can decide only by determining in what case nouns 
standing absolutely in the way that door, sun, and him 
(or he), now stand, were found in that stage of our 
language when the nominative and objective cases were 
distinguished by separate forms. 

In Anglosaxon this case was the Dative ; as up-a- 
sprungenre 8U7i/nan=the sun having arisen. 

In A. S., also, him was a dative case, so that the 
case out of which expressions like the ones in question 
originated, was dative. Hence of the two phrases, him 
excepted, and he excepted, the former is the one which 
is historicaUy correct. 

It is also the form which is logically correct. 
Almost all absolute expressions of this kind have refe- 
rence, more or less direct, to the catise of the action 
denoted. In sentences like the stable door being open, 
the horse was stolen, — the sun having arisen, the 
labourers got up to work, this idea of either a cause, 
or a coincidence like a cause, is pretty clear. 

Now the practice of language in general teaches us 
this, viz., that where there is no proper instrumental 
case expressive of cause or agency, the ablative is the 
case that generally supplies its place, and where there 
is no ablative, the dative. Hence the Latins had their 
ablative, the Anglosaxons their dative absolute. The 
genitive absolute in Greek is explicable upon other 

In spite, however, both of history and logic, the so- 
called authorities are in favour of the use of the nomi- 
native case in the absolute construction. 





§ 435. The place that a verb takes in a Proposi- 
tion varies with its character as Indeterrai/nxxte or 

(1) The Indeterminate Verb, like the Substantive 
and Pronoun, can, by itself^ form either the Subject or 
the Predicate. So far as it does this it does neither 
more nor less than the Substantive and Pronoun ; and 
it does it on the same principle. All three are Names 
— (I) the Substantive, a permanent and inconvertible 
one founded upon the qttaUtiea of the object to which 
it applies ; (2) the Pronoun, a variable or convertible 
one, founded upon the relations of its object ; (3) the 
Verb, a name which is both permanent and inconver- 
tible, but differing from a Substantive in being founded 
upon a state or action rather than on an attribute of 
either Quality or Relation. 

(2) The Finite Verb can form both the Subject 
and the Predicate — as no =^ I swim ; amo = / love^ 

It does this, however, not because, as a name, it 
has any prerogative over either the Pronoun or the 
Substantive ; but because it is, in reality, two names 
packed-up into one ; i.e. it is the name of the action 
plus that of the agent. 

§ 436. Government of Verba. — ^Verbs, whether 
Indeterminate or Finite, are, in respect to their govern- 
ment, (1) Transitive, (2) Intransitive. 

Respecting the Government of these two sorts of 
verbs, there are the two following rules : — 


1. Transitive verbs always govern the substantive 
in the objective case ; as / strike him, he striked me, 
they teach us^ the man leads the horse, &c. 

2. Intransitive verbs govern no case at all ; as / 
sleep, I walk, I think, &c. 

The same word has often two meanings, one of 
which is transitive, and the other intransitive ; as, 1. 
/ move, — where the verb is intransitive, and denotes 
the mere act of motion. 2. / m^ve my limbs, — where 
the verb is transitive, and where the action afifects a 
certain object {my limbs); or, 1. / walk, — ^where the 
verb is intransitive, and denotes the mere act of walk- 
ing. 2. / walk the horse, — where the words / waUc 
are equivalent to / cause to walk, and are also transi- 
tive, denoting an action affecting a certain object (the 

Unless this fact of the same verb having transitive 
and intransitive meanings be borne in mind, transitive 
verbs will appear to be without an objective case, and 
intransitive verbs to govern one. 

No Verb in the present English governs a Posses- 
sive, or GFenitive case. — In combinations like eal of the 
fruit of the tree, the government is that of the preposi- 
tion of* Neither is fruit in the Possessive case. That 
in Greek and Latin there were Verbs that did govern 
a Possessive is well known. And so did certain Verbs 
in Anglosaxon — weolde thises middcmgeardes = {he) 
fvled {wealded) this earth{8). 

The Verb give governs a dative case. Phrases like 
give it hvm, whom shall I give it? are perfectly 
correct, and the prepositional construction in give 
it to himj or to whom shall I give it? is un- 

The ordinary government of the Transitive Verb in 
English is that of Accusative. 


The government of verbs, as illustrated by the 
preceding examples, is objective. But it may also be 
TnodaL It is modal when the noun which follows the 
verb is not the name of any object affected by the 
verb, but the name of something explaining the manner 
in which the action of the verb takes place, the instru- 
ment with which it is done, the end for which it is 
done, &c. 

The government of transitive verbs is necessarily 
objective. It may also be modal, — / strike the eTiemy- 
with the 8Word=ferio hoatem gladio. 

The government of intransitive verbs can only be 
modal. When we say / walk the horse, the word waik 
has changed its meaning, and signifies make to walk^ 
and is, by the very fact of its being followed by the 
name of an object, converted from an intransitive into 
a transitive verb. 

The modal construction may also be called the ad- 
verbial construction ; because the effect of the noun is 
akin to that of an adverb, — I fight with bravery = I 
fight bravely ; he walks a king =^ he walks regally. 

The modal construction sometimes takes the ap- 
pearance of the objective : inasmuch as intransitive 
verbs are frequently followed by a substantive ; which 
substantive is in the objective case. To break the sleep 
of the righteous is to affect^ by breaking^ the sleep of 
the righteous : but, to sleep the sleep of the righteous^ 
is not to affect^ by sleeping, the sleep of the righteous ; 
since the act of sleeping is an act that affects no object 
whatever. It is a state. We may, indeed, give it the 
appearance of a transitive verb, as we do when we say, 
the opiate slept the patient, meaning thereby lulled to 
sleep ; but the transitive character is only apparent. 
To sleep the sleep of the righteous is to sleep in agree- 
ment with-^oT accordvng to — or after the manner of— 


the sleep of the righteoviSj and the construction is ad- 

This is the construction of a Verb with a Substan- 
tive — aUied in Tneaning with itself — nomeii sibi cog- 
ncUum. It partakes of the nature of a tautology. 

§ 437. But, besides governing the Noun, one Verb 
may govern another ; and, where this is the case, the 
verb governed is in the Infinitive Mood ; i.e. is Inde- 

The syntax of the Indeterminate verb, when thus 
in a state of regimen, is twofold ; though its double 
character is disguised by the confluence of the Grenm- 
dial form in -nne with the Infinitive form in -an. 

When one verb is followed by another without the 
preposition to, the construction must be considered to 
have grown out of the A. S. form in -an. 

I may go, not I may to go. 

I might go, — I. might to g(i. 

I can move, — I can to move. 

I could move, — I could to move. 

I wiU speak, — I will to speak. 

I would speak, — I would to speak. 

I shaU wait, — I shall to wait. 

I should wait, — I should to wait. 

Let me go, — Let me to go. 

He let me go, — He let me to go. 

I do speak, — I do /o speak. 

I did speak, — I did to speak. 

I dare go, — I dare to go. 

I durst go, — I durst to go. 

Thou shalt not tee thy brother s ox or his ass faU down by the way. 
We heard him soy, I will destroy the temple. 
I fiel the pain abate. 
He hid her alight, 

I would fitin have any one name to me that tongue that any one can 
fpeftk «• he should do by the rules of grammar. 

This, in the present English, is the rarer of the two 


Gerundial. — ^When one verb is followed by another, 
preceded by the preposition fo, i.e. / beffi/n to movey 
the construction must be considered to have grown 
out of the A. S. form in -nne. This is the case with 
the great majority of English verbs. 

6 438. / am to speah — Three facts explain this 

1. The idea of direction towards an object con- 
veyed by the dative case and by combinations equiva- 
lent to it. 

2. The extent to which the ideas of necessity, obli- 
gation, or intention are connected with the idea of 
something that has to be done^ or something towards 
which some action has a tendency. 

3. The fact is that expressions like the one in ques- 
tion, historically represent an original dative case or its 
equivalent ; since to speaJc grows out of the Anglo- 
saxon form to sprecanne^ which, although called a 
genmd, is really a dative case of the infinitive mood. 

In / am to blams the usual sense is Passive, 
i.e. / am to be blamed. As early, however, as the 
Anglosaxon period, the gerunds were liable to be used 
in a passive sense: he is to lufigenTie =not he is to 
love^ but he is to be loved. 

The principle of this confusion may be discovered 
by considering that an object to be blamed is an object 
for soTne one to blame, just as an object to be loved is 
an object for some one to love. 

Johnson thought that in such phrases the word 
blame was a noun. If he meant a noun in the wav 
that culpa is one, his view was wrong. But if he 
meant a noun in the way that culpare and ad culpan- 
dum are nouns, it was right. 

§ 439. Concord of the Verb. — The verb agrees with 


its Noun in Nwmher and in Person ; as I walk, not I 
waJOca — we walk, not we walks. 

In the way of Oender there is no question of Con- 
cord with the Verb proper ; though with the Participle 
it may, of course, present itself. In this respect, how- 
ever, the Participle of the present English is like the 
Adjective — ^wholly uninflected. 

The Concord — ^whether of Tense or Mood — ^will be 
noticed in the sequel. This is, of course, peculiar to the 
Verb ; just as Gender is to the Noun. 

In the way of Mood the construction of the Gerun- 
dial and Infinitive forms of the Indeterminate Verb has 
already been noticed. 

The construction of the Conjunctive, Subjunctive, 
Potential, or Conditional Mood belongs to the Syntax 
of Complex Propositions. 

The Imperative Mood has three characteristics. 

It can only be used in the Second Person. 

It can either use or omit its Pronoun. 

When used, the. Pronoim precedes, rather than fol- 
lows, the Verb. 

§ 440. Ten9§„jmd. Time. — Time is one thing; 
Temej^iBigjSk^^^ To constitute a Tense there must be 
an mflectian, Vocat in Latin, and calls in English, 
are Tenses. Vocaius sum and / am (or have) called 
are combinations of separate words, and of different 
elements, by which we get a substitute for a true Tense 
rather than the Tense itself. 

In Syntax J however, it is these substitutes, and 
combinations, which command our chief attention. 
The true inflectional Tenses belong to Etymology. 

The fonndation of our criticism is, of course, the 
_dif^^^"*^ ViTiHfl of Time with which an action may be 

* 1. Present — ^This is when an action is taking 

G a 


place at the time of speaking, and incomplete. — lam 
beating, I am being beaten. It is not ezpressedtin 
English, by the simple Present Tense; since Ileat 
means / am in the habit of beating. 

2. AoriaU — ^This is when an action took place in 
past time, or previous to the time of speaking, and has 
no connection with the time of speaking. — I etrucJc^l 
was stricken. It is expressed, in English, by the Pre- 
terit, in Greek by the Aorist. The term Aorist, from 
the Greek ar6piorro9=iundejinedj is a convenient name 
for this sort of time. 

3. Future. — This is when an action has neither 
taken place, nor i& taking place at the time of speak- 
ing, but which is stated as one which vrill take place. 
— It is expressed, in English, by the combination of 
^vUl or shaU with an infinitive mood ; in Latin and 
Greek by an inflection. / shall (or) vdll apeaky TJ/c- 
o"ft), dica--m. 

None of these expressions imply more than a single 
action ; in other words, they have no relation to any 
second action occurring simultaneously' with them, 
before them, or after them, — / am speaking now^ I 
spoke yesterday, I shaU speak to-morrow* 

By considering past, present, or future actions not 
only by themselves, but as relat<ed to other past, present, 
'or future actions, we get fresh varieties of expression. 
Thus, an act may have been going on, when some other 
act, itself one of past time, interrupted it. Here the 
action agrees with a present action in being incomplete ; 
but it differs from it in having been rendered incomplete 
by an action that is past. This is exactly the case with 

4. Imperfect. — I was reading when he entered. 
Here we have two acts ; the act of reading and the act 
of entering. Both are past as regards the time of 


epeaking, but both are present as regards each other. 
This is expressed, in English, by the past tense of the 
verb substantive and the present participle, 1 was 
epeahi/ng ; and in Latin and Greek by the imperfect 
tense, dUxham, h-uirrov. 

5. Perfect, — Action past, but connected with the 
present by its effects or consequences, — I have written^ 
and here is the letter. Expressed in English by the 
auxiliary verb have followed by the participle passive 
in the Accusative Case and Neuter Gender. The 
Greek expresses this by the reduplicate perfect: t^ 
Tv^^^slhxive beaten. 

6. Pluperfect — Action past, but connected with a 
second action subsequent to it, which is also past — I 
had written when he came in. 

7. Future present. — Action future as regards the 
time of speaking ; present as regards some future time. 
— / shall be speaking about this time to-^morrow. 

8. Fvlure Preterit. — Action future as regards the 
time of speaking, past as regards some future time. — / 
shall have spoken by this time to^morroio. 

§ 441. These are the chief expressions which are 
simply determined by the relations of actions to each 
other and to the time of speaking, either in the English 
or any other language. But over and above the simple 
idea of time^ there may be others superadded : thus, 
the pEnise, I do speak, means, not only that / am in 
the habit of speaking, but that I also insist upon it 
being understood that I am so. 

Again, an action that is mentioned as either taking 
place, or as having taken place at a given time, may 
take place again and again. Hence the idea of habit 
may arise out of the idea of either present time or 
aorist time. 

The emphalio Present aiid Preterit. — Expressed 

9 2 


by do (or did), as stated above. A man says / do 
(or did) speak, read, &c., when, either directly or 
by implication, it is asserted or impliied that he does 
not. As a question implies doubt, do is used in inter- 

Do et did indicant emphatice tempos pnesens et pneteritom impe^ 
fectum. UrOf urebam; I bum, I burned: vol (emphatice) / do bttrn, 
I did bum, — ^Waixis, p. 106. 

§ 442. The Predictive FutvA^e. — I shaU be there to- 
"morrow. — This means simply that the speaker will be 
present. It gives no clue to the circumstances th&t 
will determine his being so. 

The Promisaive Future. — 1 wiU be there UMn/OT" 
row. — ^This means not only that the speaker will be 
present, but that he i/nt&nda being so. 

§ 443. Th^,rq^e8exiiaiidl^.,.&l^^ 
future ti/me. — ^An action may be past ; yet, for the sate" 
~oF bringing it m ore vividl y before the hearers, we may 
make it present. Me walks (for walked) up to him, and 
knocks (for knocked) him down, is, by no means, the 
natural habitual power of the English present. So^in 
respect to a future, I beat yooj^Ji^ .!umiu dM!t kcwspji 
for / u*ill beat you. This is sometimes called the his- 
toric use of the present tense. I find it more conveni- 
ent to call it the representative use : inasmuch as it is 
used more after the principles of painting than of his- 
tory ; the former of which, necessarily, represerUs things 
as present, the latter, more naturally, describes them 
as past. 

§ 444. Notwithstanding its namfi^ he present tg aggt 

in English, does not express a stncH^j/resent^^on. J^ 

'ratnjjr expressesan Jjabitual one. He speaks weU^he i^ 

-ft good spealcer. If a man means to say that he is in 

the act of speaking, he says I am speaking. It has also» 


especially T?heii combined with a subjunctive mood, a 
future power — I heat yow {=sIwiU beat you) if you 
dorCt leave off. Again — the English preterit is the 
equivalent, not to the Greek perfect, but to the Greek 
aorist. I heat=^iTv^a^ not TiTVif>cu The true perfect 
is expressed, in English, by the auxiliary Aat;6 + the 
past participle. 

§ 445. Meseema. — Equivalent to it seems to me ; 
mihi videtur ; ^cuverat fwi. Here, seems is intransi- 
tive ; and me has the power of a dative case. 

Methvriks. — ^In the Anglosaxon there are two forms ; 
ysTican^to think, and yincan^to seem. It is from 
the latter that the verb in methinks comes. The verb 
is intransitive ; the pronoun dative. 

Methought I saw my late espoused wifo 
Brought to me, like Alcestis, from the grave. 


Me listeth or me lists. — Equivalent to it pleases 
tnesme juvaU Anglosaxon lystan=to wish, to 
choose, also to please^ to delight. Unlike the other 
two, this verb is transitive, so that me is accusative. 
These three are the only true impersonal verbs in the 
English language. They form a class by themselves, 
because no pronoim accompanies them, as is the case 
with the equivalent expressions it appears, it pleases, 
and with all the other verbs in the language. 

§ 446. The^uxiliary Verbs, in English, play a most 
importanrf^ctia the Synlax of the language. They 
I. classified upon a variety of principles. The 
following, however, are all that need here be applied. 

According to their inflectional or non-inflsctional 
powers. — ^Inflectional auxiliaries are those that may 
either replace or be replaced by an inflection. Thus — 
/ am «^ntdfc=the Latin ferior and the Greek nJw^ 


TOfjLoi, These auxiliaries are in the same relation to 
verbs that prepositions are to nouns. The chief inflec- 
tional auxiliaries are : — 

1. Have ; equivalent to an inflection in the way of 
tense — I have bitten^rnO'^rnordd. 

2. ShaU ; ditto. / shaU call ^voo-abo* 

3. WUl; ditto. I vrUI caU=vo<Hibo. 

4. May ; equivalent to an inflection in the way of 
mood. / am come that I may aee^venio ut vid-earru 

5. Be; equivalent to an inflection in the way of 
voice. To be beaten=verbei*ariy TxnrrsaOau 

6. -4m, art^ is, are ; ditto. Also equivalent to an 
inflection in the way of tense. / am moving =i7nove-o. 

7. Was, were; ditto. I ^vas beaten^ i'Twf>0rjv: I 
was mov^ing^m/)ve^am. 

§ 447. According to their Tion-^uxiliary aignificor 
tions. — The power of the word have in the combina- 
tion / have a horse, is clear enough. In I have ridden 
a horse, it is by no means so clear. The power of the 
same word in the combination / have been, is not at all 
clear ; nevertheless it is a power which has grown out 
of the idea of possession. This shows that the power 
of a verb as an auxiliary may be a modification of its 
original power ; i.e. of the power it has in non-auxiliary 
constructions. Sometimes the difference is very little : 
the word let, in let us go, has its natural sense of per- 
mission unimpaired. Sometimes it is all but lost. Can 
and may exist chiefly as auxiliaries. 

1. Auxiliary derived from the idea of possession — 

2. Auxiliaries derived from the idea of existence — 
be, is, \vas. 

3. Auxiliary derived from the idea of future desti- 
nation dependent upon circimistances external to the 
agent — shall. 


4. Auxiliary derived from the idea of future desti- 
nation dependent upon the volition of the agent — wUL 
Shall is simply Predictive ; wUl is Predictive and Pro- 
missive as well. 

5. Auxiliary derived from the idea of power, depen- 
dent upon circumstances external to the agent — may, 

6. Auxiliary derived from the idea of power, depen- 
dent upon circumstances internal to the agent — can. 
May is simply Permissive ; can is Potential. In respect 
to the idea of power residing in the agent as the cause 
which determines a contingent action, can is in the 
same relation to may as vdll is to shall, 

7. Auxiliary derived from the idea of sufferance — let, 

8. Auxiliary derived from the idea of necessity — 

9. Auxiliary derived from the idea of action — do. 

§ 448. In respect to their onode of construction. — 
Auxiliary verbs combine with others in three ways. 

]• With Participles, — a.) With the present, or 
active participle — / am speaking : b) With the past, 
or passive, participle — I am beaten, I have beatenu 

2. With infinitives. — a) With the objective infini- 
tive — I can speak : b) With the gerundial infinitive 
— I have to speak. 

3. With both infinitives and participles, — I shall 
have done, I mean to have done. 

§ 449. Participles. — A Participle, like an Adjec- 
tive, can form the Predicate of a Proposition, but not 
the Subject. 

So far as its Inflection goes, the Participle agrees 
with the Adjective. So far as it suggests a state or an 
action rather than a quality it is an adjective. 

§ 450. The Past Participle preceded by Have. — • 
Upon this it is advisable to make the following classi- 
fications : — 


1. The combination with the participle of a Tra'nr 
sitive verb, — I have ridden the mare; than hast brO' 
ken the sword ; he Itas smitten the enemy. 

2. The combination with the participle of an In- 
transitive verb, — I have waited ; thou hast hungered; 
he has slept, 

3. The combination with the participle of the Verb 
Substantive, — I have been; thou hast been; he has 

It is by examples of the first of these three divisions 
that the true construction is to be shown. 

For an object of any sort to be in the possession of 
a person, it must previously have existed. If I possess 
a mare, that mare must have had a previous existence. 
Hence, in all expressions like / have ridden a mare, 
there are two ideas, a past idea in the participle, and a 
present idea in the word denoting possession. 

For an object of any sort, affected in a particular 
manner, to be in the possession of a person, it must 
previously have been affected in the manner required. 
If I possess a mare that has been ridden, the riding 
must have taken place before I mention the fact of the 
ridden mare being in my possession ; inasmuch as I 
speak of it as a thing already done, — the participle, 
ridden, being in the past tense. 

/ have ridden a mare = I liave a mare ridden^ I 
have a mare as a ridden mxire. In this case the sjm- 
tax is of the usual sort. (1.) Have=own=:habeo=^ 
teneo ; (2.) mare is the accusative case=equam; 
(3.) ridden is a past participle, agreeing either with 
m^re, or with a word in apposition with it under' 
stood. Mark the words in italics. The word ridden 
does not agree with mare, since it is, virtually, of the 
neuter gender. 

The true construction is arrived at by supplying the 


"Word ihing. I have a mare as a ridden thing=habeo 
equam equUatum (neuter). 

(2) The combination of have with an mtransitive 
verb is irreducible to the idea of possession : indeed it 
is illogical. In / have waited^ we cannot make the 
idea expressed by the word waited the object of the 
verb have or possess. The expression has become a part 
of language by means of the extension of a false 
analogy. It is an instance of an illegitimate imitation. 

(3) The combination of have with been is more 
illogical still, and is a stronger instance of the influ- 
ence of an illegitimate imitation. In German and 
Italian, where the ordinary Intransitive Participles are 
combined with have, the Participle of the Substantive 
Verb is combined with am. 

Italian ; to sono stato \ j ^^ . ^ 
German ; tch bin geweunj 

The Scandinavian language and the French agree 
with the English. 

Danish ; jeg har varet. 
French ; fai UL 

§ 4^1. The Past Participle preceded by Am; Be, 
Been, &c. — The Participles Tnoved, beaten, struck, 
given, are Participles of a past tense. Hence, I am 
Tnaved should mean, not / am in the act of being 
moved, but / am a person vjho has been Trwved ; — he 
is beaien should mean, not he is a person who is in the 
act of sufferimg a beaming, but one who has suffered a 
beating : in other words the sense of the combination 
should be past, and not present. By a comparison 
between the English and Latin languages this anomaly 
becomes very apparent. The Latin word mctus is 
exactly equivalent to the English word nmxyoed* ^&df^ 


is a Participle of the passive voice, and of the past 
tense. Besides this, sum in Latin equals / am in 
English. Yet the Latin phrase motiis sum is equiva- 
lent, not to the English combination / am m/yued^ but 
to the combination / have been moved ; ue, it has a 
past and not a present sense. In Greek the difference 
is plainer still, because in Greek there are two Partici- 
ples Passive, one for the present, and another for the 
past tense ; e.g. n/Trrofisvo? el/u=I am one in the ad 
of undergoing a beating ; rsrvfjt/jJpos slfu^^I am, one 
who has undergone a beating. 

Nevertheless the sense, in English, of such combi- 
nations as / am moved, &c., is Present. The absence 
of any such Tense in English as moveor in Latin and 
TVTJTOfxai in Greek goes far towards explaining this dif- 

§ 452. The Participle in -dng. — ^Taken themselves 
words of this class are of the simplest. These appear 
in three very natural constructions. 

(!) He is dying, — Here dying is Predicative = 
mm^itur (est moi^iens). 

(2) The last rays of tlie dying day. — Here it is 
purely 'Pa.rticiipml^ morientis did: 

(3) Day glimmers (fer the dymg and tJte dead. — 
Here it is Substantival after the manner of an Adjec- 
tive whose Substantive is understood — morientes et 

All this is purely Participial ; and, as the Parti- 
ciple is as destitute of Inflection as the Adjective, its 
Syntax is limited to the Collocation in the Predicative, 
and to the use of the in the Substantival forms. 

It happens, however, that the form and construc- 
tion are two of the most disputed points in Englisli. 
It has already been shown that between the Verbal 
Ifoun and the Indeterminate Verb, there is a close 


Gonnection in import ; that between the Participie in 
-/id, and the Verbal Noun in ^ng^ there was in Anglo- 
saxon and the older English, a well-marked difference 
of form ; but that during the middle period of our lan- 
guage the two forms became identical (or Ccmfluenf). 
Ambiguous, or equivocal, forms and constructions were 
noticed by our earlier grammarians ; such as Lowth and 
others. In such a sentence as Wliat is the meaning of 
the lady's holding up her fan ? it was not diflBcult to 
see that, so far as the Definite Article went, the con- 
struction was Substantival, but that so far as there was 
no preposition before fan it was Participial. The lady 
hjoldmg up her fan would have been wholly Partici- 
pial, and the lady's Iwlding up of her fan would have 
been wholly Substantival ; but the lady's liolding up 
her fan was partly Participial and partly Substantival. 
What, then, was the form in "i/tig when the sentence 
was taken as a whole ? This was, evidently, more easily 
asked than answered. An edition of Home Tooke's 
' Diversions of Purley,' by the late Eichard Taylor, put 
the general question as to the import of -ii\g in some- 
thing like the form of a definite doctrine. It drew 
attention to words like morning^ where there was no 
such verb as to mom ; to constructions like mxyrning 
walk; where the collocation was that of running 
brooky movmg crowds or flying bird ; and above all to 
the so-called vulgarisms, pronunciations, or archaisms 
like Orhuntvng, OrToaming, and others, wherein the 
construction was that of a Substantive in the Oblique 
Case, preceded by a preposition (on, or in), which was 
first worn down into a, and then dropped altogether. 
This was not ill-timed. Even in Grimm's Deutsche 
Grammatiky the construction of dying day =^ the day 
on which a person dies is treated as if dying were a 


There is a great deal in this that is clear enough to 
speak for itself; but there is a wide diflFerence between 
the reducibility of the different constructions, and 
sometimes between different words in the same con- 
struction. There are differences, too, of meaning 
(slight ones, perhaps, but still real) between such com- 
binations as / was hunting and / ^vas Or-hunting, 
which may make one expression the more correct in one 
case, and the other in another. And there is a great 
deal of miscellaneous detail beside. I cannot, however, 
find that this is the view with which the hypothesis 
has been taken up. It has certainly been adopted and 
promulgated. But, in my mind, more has been done 
in publishing, than in verifying, it : and that it has 
been prematurely extended to a doubtful, if not an 
illegitimate, degree. Unfortunately, in this, as in 
several other similar cases, it is not easy to find a 
writer who explicitly and unmistakeably tells the 
reader how far he goes, where he stops, and whether he 
stops at all ; i.e. whether he stops short of the absolute 
elimination of the Present Participle as a separate and 
independent Part of Speech, and the substitution of 
the Verbal Abstract in its place. That there are quar- 
ters in which something of this kind may be found is 
certain ; and it is certain, that whether right or 
wrong, it wants a fuller exposition than it has hitherto 

§ 453. The diflBculty, then, respecting the forms in 
"l/ng lies in the equivocal character of the words to 
which it belongs. If one of them thus ending is clearly 
and admittedly a Substantive, we know liow to deal 
with it ; and we know how to deal with it if it is a 
Participle. In some cases, too, we can tell by mere 
inspection, either firom the outward form of the word, 
or from its place in the proposition, to which of the two 


classes a word belongs. Thus in Seei/ng is believing 
the word seeing constitutes a Subject, and that by 
itself: and as we can just as easily say believing is 
seeing, the word believing does the same. Again, in 
such words as risings, watchings, {the risings in the 
North ; the watchings of a sleepless man), the inflec- 
tion in -8 is absolutely unknown in the Participle. Not- 
withstanding this, there is a wide margin for uncer- 
tainty and ambiguity. 

Given, however, the Part of Speech, the construc- 
tion is easy. When the word is Substantival, it governs 
the noim by which it is preceded in the Possessive Case, 
and the noim by which it is followed through the Pre- 
position of — what is the meaning of the lad/ifs holcU 
ing-up of her fan ? 

It does this in the way of government when it 
governs anything at all. The Participle, on the other 
hand, when it governs anything (which it only does 
when its verb is Transitive) governs it directly, and as 
a Verb, rather than indirectly, through a Preposition. 
Another sign of the Substantive is the Definite Article 
the. Sometimes there is the omission of the Article^ 
sometimes that of the Person. 

The seeing these effects will be 
Both noisome and infectious. 

Cymh, i. 5. 25. 

Nothing in his life 

Became him like the leaving it. 

Macb. i. 4. 8. 

Abbott, &c, § 98. 

There is a slight overstatement in the following 
extract as to the generality at present of the use of the 
Definite Article. In combinations like ^Seeing is 6e- 
lieving,^ where it would be out of place, it is omitted 
as regularly now as ever it was. T\veietaaxV'^^\kS3r««s^'t^ 


will illustrate the kind of irregularity which has a ten- 
dency to occur. 

Tho Verbal differs in Elizabethan English from its modern use (a). 
"We do not employ the verbal as a noun followed by ' of,' unless the 
verbal be preceded by 'the' or some such defining adjective. But 
such phrases as the following are of constant occurrence in Elizabethan 
English : — 

To dissuade the people from making of league. 

North' 8 PltUarch, 170. 

By winning only of SicUia, 

Id. 171. 

(&) On the other hand, when the verbal is constituted a noun by 
the dependence of ' the/ or any other adjective (except a possessive 
a^i^^'^e) tipon it, we cannot omit the of. The Elizabethans can. 

' To plague thee for thy fovl misleading me.' 

3 Hen. VL i. 97. 

We should prefer now to omit the * thy ' as well as * foul,' though 
we have rejected such phrases as — 

' Upon hu leaving our house.' 

Ibid. § 373. 

§ 454. ' Conaidermg oil things ' and ' all things 
considered.'^ — Such a combination as ' cdl things con- 
sidered ' may be continued and completed in two ways. 
"We may say either ' it is evident thaty &c., or we can 
see that, &c. Thus — 

* All things consider^?, it is evident that the result wiU be ruinous.' 
' All things considerec^, toe can see that tho result will be ruinous.' 

Here the Participle is Passive, and the construction 
that of the Case Absolute. 

In ' considering aU things ' the Participle is Active 
and the conditions of the continuation are limited to a 
single construction. "We can, with a clear understand- 
ing of the construction, say — 

Considering all thingSt we can see that the result will be ruinous. 


But we cannot, with an equally clear understanding 
of the construction, say — 

Considertn^ all things, it is evident that the result will be ruinous. 

Nevertheless we do say so ; though, if we are asked 
who is the considerer, or how the considering is done, 
we are perplexed as to our answer. 

In respect to its import the combination is that 
which we get from the Case Absolute ; and there is 
something like the notion of either cause or condition 
at the bottom of it. But it is indefinite ; inasmuch 
as the Participle, when it stands alone, is (like the In- 
finitive Mood) at least as much of a Substantive as a 
Verb. Dr. Abbott, implicitly, tells us this ; for (§ 357) 
he gives us examples of the Infinitive Mood, used in the 
same sense ; and he gives us Infinitive Moods which he 
compares with it, and explains it in the same language 
as he does equivalent combinations with the Verbal (or 

To do the deed, 
Promotion foUows. W. T. i. 2. 356. 

To know my deed, 'twere best not know myself. 

Macbeth, ii. 2. 73. 

Here the meaning is ^ if the deed were done, or ' the 
deed being doneJ* The two forms run easily into the 
Latin — me actore^ or 7ne agente ; though in the first 
the agent is less definite than the action. 

In the following the meaning is ' in respect to, or 
^ as far cls it concerns '=gtu>d ad {vne) attvnet. Still, 
like the Case Absolute, it lies without the pale of the 
ordinary construction : — 

To belie him I will not. 

A, W, iv. 3. 200. 

To iU€ to live, I find I seek to die, 
And seeking death find life. 

Mirror for Magtttratw,vC\.V W 


In the following we have the form in -^mg : — 

Why, "were thy education ne*ep so mean, 
Having thy limbs, a thousand fairer courses 
OfFer themselves to thy election. 
Ben Jcnson: Every Man in his Humour , ii. 1. § 372. 

Here Dr. Abbott (§ 373), after an explanation upon 
which T lay somewhat less stress than he does, and after 
referring to the previously-quoted passages, writes, in 
respeot to having^ that it = ' since thow hast thy 

All this is the Case Absolute, but with the addi- 
tional element of indefinitude in the name of the agent 
being kept back : and in this it agrees with ' cM things 

The construction, then, is Absolute. It is, also, 
Indefinite : indeed, it is given by Dr. Abbott, as the 
^Indefinite use of the Infinitive.'* But between In- 
definitude and Confusion the barrier is but slight. 
Unless we make con^dering a Case Absolute, we have 
faulty Grammar, but average English. If we translate 
' considering ' by ' considerationej we have imexcep- 
tionable Grammar, but doubtful English. I believe, 
however, that few will do so. There are other ways of 
accounting for it. In 7 am to blame=I am to be 
blamed we have the transfer of an Active sense to a 
Passive. But I doubt whether this be the explanation. 
Any one who analyses the clauses with which this sec- 
tion began will see that, when he gets to the word 
' that,^ the construction suits either form of the pre- 
liminary one. I submit, then, that when this is the 
case, the exact process that connects it with the prelimi- 
nary one is neglected, overlooked, or ignored. Some- 
times its character is determined by the matters consid- 
ered, sometimes by the persons who consider, and that, 


between these two, confusion may arise. We may call 
this attraction if we like ; but I believe that between 
the Action and Seaction of the two clauses in a sen- 
tence, the solution to the difiSculty is to be found. 



§ 455. An Adverb is a word incapable of forming, 
by itself, a whole term ; but capable of forming part of 
one ; in which case it is connected with the verb ; e.g. 
the sun shines brightly. 

The syntax of the adverb is simpler than that of 
any other part of speech, excepting, perhaps, that of 
the adjective. 

Adverbs have no concord ; neither have they any 

When we say that Adverbs, &c., are words which, 
though they can form a part of a Proposition, cannot 
form a whole one, we imply that, in the Proposition in 
which they, occur, some Noun or Verb (i.e. some word 
which can form a whole one) is necessary ; and in the 
relations which the Adverb, the Preposition, and the 
Conjunction bear to these fundamental and essential 
words lie the characters by which, as Parts of Speech, 
they are distinguished from one another. 

With the Adverb only one of these is required. 
This is either the Verb or the Participle — he fights 
bravely; he is fi^hti/ng bravely. But as Adjectives 
differ from Participles in conveying the notion of a 
state rather than that of an action. Adverbs may com- 
bine with Adjectives as well — he is vert| brcwe. 

H E 


Provided, then, that under the term Verb we include 
the Participles and the Adjectives, Adverb is a well- 
chosen name for the class. 

§ 456. The Adverbs, like the Adjectives, have their 
Degrees of Comparison, and the few rules upon this point 
that are given in § 422 apply to both Parts of Speech 

(a) The Adjective in the Neuter Gender may be 
used Adverbially — the sun shmes bright =bHghtly. 

(6) '^Tien the Adjective itself ends in -Zt/, the ad- 
dition of the Adverbial -ly is, to say the least, cumbrous. 
We can say bravely ; but not manlily. 

(c) The addition of -er and ^eat is not, perhaps, so 
freely used as it might be. Oftener is, perhaps, com- 
moner than more often. But, then, there is no such 
Adjective as often. When, as in bright^- slow , &c., 
there is an Adjective, the Neuter form for the Degrees 
of Comparison is generally preferred to the afl&xes -^r 
and -est of the Adverb itself; i.e. the sun shines 
brighter to-day than it did yesterday, rather than the 
sun shines brightlier, &c. The combination morey as 
tnore brightly, has a similar preference. In short, the 
actual Comparison of the Adverb is rare, if not obso- 
lescent ; and what applies to the Comparative Degree 
applies to the Superlative also. 

§ 457. Adverbs apparently categorematic. — A few 
Adverbs seem to form, by themselves, a Predicate ; and, 
80 doing, form either real or apparent exceptions to the 
definition of this Part of Speech. 

Adverbs after * w.' — We still say * that is wdl ; ' but, perhaps, no 
other Adverb (except ' soon ') is now thus used. Shakespeare, however, 
has — 

* That's verify:— Tempest, ii. 1. 321. 

* That's wortkay.'—Corid. iv. 1. 63. 

' ItQcius' banishment was tDrongfuUy: — T. A. iy. 4. 10. 


Some yerb, u ' said/ or * done,' is easily anderstood. ' In harbour ' has 
the force of a verb in — 

' Safdy in harbonr 
Is the king's ship.' — Tempetty i. 2. 226. 

Abbott: Shakeaperian Grammar^ &c., § 78. 

With there (as in it is there), and more rarely with 
then (it was then), the construction is rather that of a 
Pronoun in an Oblique Case, with the names for place 
(direction) and time understood. 

§ 458. Migration. — Home Tooke, in his ' Diver^ 
siona of Purley^ remarks upon a dictum of Servius, 
^quodvis verbum, quum deainit ease quod eat, mi- 
grot in Adverbium,^ that it means when a grammarian 
does not know what to do with a word he makes it an 

Professor Key, too, has devoted a whole chapter of 
his work upon Language to the question as to whether 
the Adverb be really a Part of Speech or not. Ques- 
tions of this kind suggest that what we have seen on 
a small scale, in the case of the Definite and Inde- 
finite Articles, will be seen on a large scale, in that of 
the Adverbs. As far as form and origin went, the words 
the and an were Pronominal. So far, however, as their 
import in the structure of sentences went, they were far 
removed from the Pronoun. With the Adverbs the 
principle of the question is the same : for there is a 
conflict between their origin as so many individual 
words, and their import as elements in a proposition. 
Rut, instead of constituting, like the Articles, a small 
class which could be referred at once to Pronouns, 
they constitute not only a large class, but a very 
heterogeneous one — indeed, much such a one as we 
expect from the ddctum of Servius. The mere inspec- 
tion of any ordinary list tells us this. A\ixiQ%\< «s'^^^ 

n H 2 


Adjective can be traced to some other Part of Speech 
— words like 7ieed (as needs rmust go = of necessity)^ 
unawares, backwards, and others in -s to the G-enitive 
Singular of Substantives ; words like there and then to 
the oblique cases of Pronouns ; and above all the forms 
in 'ly to the Adjectives ; not to mention the Neuter 
Adjectives with Adverbial imports ; and the long list of 
compounds like perchance, perhaps, peradventure, 
alive, agog, above, agape, together, altogether, besides, 
moreover, &c. 



§ 459. The Preposition, like the Adverb, can only 
form a part of a Proposition. 

Of those words which, by themselves, can form a 
term, the Preposition requires two, with which it must 
be connected. The Adverb required only one. 

The Adverb required either a Verb or a Participle ; 
or else an Adjective — all closely allied Parts of Speech. 
The Preposition requires either a Noun or a Pronoun, 
In this it will agree with the Conjunction, by which, as 
a Part of Speech, it will be followed, rather than with 
the Adverb by which it has been preceded. Indeed, it is 
the Conjunction with which the Preposition is more 
closely connected than with the Adverb. Hence the 
Syntax of the Pronoim is intermediate, or transitional, 
between that of the Simple and the Complex Propoai- 

§ 460. A Preposition, then, is a word which can 
enter into a proposition only when combined with a 


Substantive or a Pronoun ; and of these there must be 
two; as 

John is going to London. 
James is coming /r&77i London. 

The following words, along with several others, are 
Prepositions — in, on^ of, at, up, by, to, for, from, till, 
with, through ; and any one can find out for himself 
that wherever there is a Proposition in which any words 
of this kind enter there is always a word correspond- 
ing with John or James in the extract, and another 
that corresponds with London. The latter is governed 
by the Preposition. We may, of course, transpose the 
parts of the sentence, or clause, and say — 

To London John is going. 
From London James is coming. 

But it is only an exceptional transposition, like — 

Great is Diana of the Ephesians^ &c. 

There may be more than two such Substantives or 
Pronouns in a sentence, or a clause ; as the S\in from 
the sky, ahmea upon the Earthy through the air, with 
his bright beams, &c. But still there are two. They 
need not lie different ones ; for the Sun is the Subject 
throughout ; but upon, through, &c., are the several 
Prepositions, each governing its special Substantive or 

§ 461. All Prepositions govern a case. If a word 
fail to do this, it fails to be a preposition. In the first 
of the two following sentences the word up is a prepo- 
sition, in the second an adverb. 

1. I climhed up the tree. 

2. / climbed up. 

All prepositions in English precede the uoMii ^VosSsi 


they govern. / climbed up the tree, never / diTnhed 
the tree up. This is a matter not of government, but 
of collocation. The same, however, is the case in most 
languages ; and, from the frequency of its occurrence, 
the term pre-poaition (or prefix) has originated. 
Nevertheless, it is by no means a philological necessity. 
In more languages than one the prepositions are post- 
positive, i.e. they follow their noun. 

Nevertheless, in English they always precede it. Still 
it is only the noun which they govern that is preceded 
by them. They follow the one upon which the sentence 
or the clause depends. As a class they are /7i<«r-posi- 
tions rather than either Pre-positions or Po^^-positions. 
Still, for English and many other languages, the name 
Preposition is an adequate one. 

§ 462. Every Preposition in English governs a 
Case ; and in the present English no Preposition 
governs a Possessive or Genitive. This remark is 
made, because expressions like the part of the body 
^para corporis, — apiece of the bread =portio panis, 
make it appear as if the preposition of did so. The 
true expression is, that the preposition of, followed by 
an objective case, is equivalent, in many instances, to 
the Genitive Case of the classical languages. 

It is not so safe to say in the present English 
that no preposition governs a dative. The expression 
give it hiw, is good English ; and it is also equivalent 
to the Latin da ei. But we may also say give it to 
hirru Now the German zu==to governs a Dative case, 
and in Anglosaxon, the preposition to, when prefixed to 
the infinitive mood, required the case that followed it 
to be a Dative. 

§ 463. In constructions like 

To err is human, to forgive divine, 
the combination to err = erring = error \ vrhilat to forgive •» forgiving » 


firgwenen. Here the Fzeposition most be considered as incorponted 
with the Indeterminate Verb, which has the sense of a Sabstantive, just 
like an inseparable inflection — and a yeiy rare and remarkable instance 
of amalgamation this is. In the following example, although a Grecism, 
the combination is governed like a Noun in the Objective Case by 
another Preposition. 

Tet not to have been dipt in Lethe's lake 
Could save the son of Thetis .^*om to die. 

This is from Milton; but the so-called vulgarism 
/ aTTi ready for to go is genuine English. 

§ 464. In compounds like upstanding, and approx- 
imato compounds like standing-^p, the apparent Pre- 
position is, in reality, an Adverb. 

The present Objective Case includes, with Subsian- 
HveSj (though not with the typical) Pronouns, the Ac- 
cusative and Dative. These in Anglosaxon were dis- 

But even in Anglosaxon the Dative represented : 
(1) The Dative proper; (2) the Ablative; (3) the 
Instrumental; and (4) the Locative. Each of these 
had its special Pronoun, viz. : 

The Dative -^o. 
The Ablative ^from. 
The Instrumental n«M7A. 
The Locative = t». 

And these are the Cases which, even at present, though 
the signs are lost, are the cases which to, from, with, 
and in virtually govern. 

In A. S. the government was real ; at least, more so 
than it is in the present English. When Datives, In- 
strumentals, and Accusatives had different signs there 
was room for fedse combinations in the way of Govern- 

At present where, with the exception of Possessive, 
all the Oblique cases are alike, error on this score is 


§ 465. In the way of history, the following Frepoeitions have 
become obsolete : 

Mid displaced by with, 

06 „ „ until, even to, 

Ymhe „ „ around, roundabout. 

On the other hand, in as compared with on, was rare in Anglo- 
sazon. Of the following words there has been a change rather than a 
loss — eke, ar^ fear^ geond, neah. 

Now what cases did these prepositions chiefly govern? If we look to 
the Latin or the Greek we shall not be surprised if we find that, as a 
rule, they governed more cases than one. They do this most in the 
Greek. In the Greek, too, there are more cases governed. Still, in both 
languages, we find that, in some cases, the connexion with the Preposi- 
tion and its Case is special and exclusive ; e.g, de governs nothing but 
an Ablative, Ik nothing but a Genitive. 

Putting the Instrumental and Locative out of the question, we shall 
find that the Case which is governed by the fewest Prepositions is th*» 
Genitive or Possessive; then the Accusative. This leaves us only the 
Dative, and this is governed by more Prepositions. than both the others 
put together. 

Van and utan—from and out of governed the Genitive. • 

Through, with, and t/mbe were the words that most exclusively go- 
verned an Accusative. 

All the other Prepositions were followed by the Dative rather than 
any other case ; viz. at = to ; he = hy ; for ; from ; of ; to. 

Of these <?/is the most important ; because its chief use is in com- 
binations like of a father, of men and the like, where it can generally l)e 
rendered by the Genitive (Possessive) form (or Case) in -/»; as fathers 
son = son of father and vie: virsd. This engenders a hopelessly lax way 
of speakinp. Because o/ is part of a combination which has a Genitive 
or Possessive sense, it passes for ' the sign of the Genitive Case* How fair 
this error affects English Grammar is well known. The French it per- 
vades from first to last. Yet the evidence that the Case governed by de 
is virtually Ablative is notorious. There is no practical remedy for this. 
All that the present writer can do is to draw attention to the fact that 
a preposition in a certain combination, forming a substitute for a case, 
is a very different thing from one governing that Case, when it has a true 
Inflectional sign as such. 

In Combinations like all the more, all the better, &c., the word the is 
not the uninflected Deflnite Article, but the \>g, or the Instrumental 
Case of that. 

§ 466. And this leads us to the part played by Pre- 
positions in the passage of languages from a Synthetic 
to an Analytic coiid\t\oTi, TV\& TwvLloXivA ^wsLtdvdis is 


that of the Auxiliary Verbs. As these last, in combi- 
natioBS like / was speaking =loquebar, or / have 
beaten=T8Tv<^ give us substitutes for the old inflec- 
tional Tenses, &c., so do the Prepositions give us sub- 
stitutes for the lost inflectional Cases. In English, 
where we have no true Case except the Possessive, the 
part played by the Pronouns is important ; and in the 
French, where there is not even a true Pronoun or 
Genitive Case, it is more important still. 



§ 467. Syntax deals with (1) the connection of 
Words, and (2) the connection of Propositions. The 
Syntax that deals with that of words, or the Syntax of 
simple propositions, has already come under notice. 
The Syntax that deals with the connection of proposi- 
tions now commands attention. Attention, too, must 
be given to the word connection. It, by no means, 
follows that because we And a long list of propositions 
following each other, there is a connection between 
them. Like marbles in a bag, to use an old illustra- 
tion, they may touch without cohering ; having as little 
relation to each other, as so many difiFerent essa3rs or 
chapters. This is the case with proverbs, riddles, and 
the like, where each sentence constitutes a whole. In 
ordinary composition, however, this extreme isolation 
is rare. In ordinary composition the chances are, that 
out of three propositions, the middle one will have a 
double relation ; one with its predecessor, one with its 
follower. This relation sometimes is, and sometimes 
is not, expressed by a special word. 

Jjajing, then, out of oiur account i\io^ ^xcr^'&VMvs^'^ 


which, though they may stand in juxta-position with one 
another, have no grammatical connection, we come to 
the consideration of those sentences in which there are 
not only two (or more) propositions, but also a connect- 
ing link between them : or, if not this, something in 
the nature of the one, which implies, or presupposes, 
the other. This is the case with Questions and Answers. 
But though Questions and Answers, along with a few 
other details of minor importance, come under this 
division of Syntax ; they, by no means, constitute the 
most important part of it. The most important part 
of it is constituted by the Conjunctions and the Relative 

§ 468. It is convenient to begin with the Conjunc- 

Notwithstanding their apparent miimportance, few 
Parts of Speech require closer consideration than the 
Conjunctions ; and that most especially in reference to 
their Syntax. We do not see this very conspicuously 
in English, because in English the diflFerence between 
the Moods of the Verb, is at a m^inimum. We have 
not much to do with the Subjunctive ; and of Optative 
Moods we have none. But in Greek we know that, be- 
tween the Optative and the Subjunctive, a very notable 
portion of the Syntax is devoted to several not very 
easy investigations. 

§ 469. The principle, however, by which Conjunc- 
tions take their place as Parts of Speech, and exercise 
their influence in the Government and Concord of 
Verbs, is the same in all languages. 

The Conjunctions, like the Prepositions and Adverbs, 
are Uninflected, and like the Prepositions and Adverbs, 
are incapable of forming, by theTnselves, either the 
Subject or the Predicate of a Proposition. But here 
the agreement ceaaeft. Both the Adverb and the Pre- 


position form parts of the term in which they appear ; 
indeed, if they did not, we could not call them parts. 
But the Conjunction forms neither the part of a Term 
nor the whole of one. 

It comes between two ; but forms a part of neither. 

Generally^ though, perhaps, not always^ these two 
terms belong to diflferent Propositions. Hence, practi- 
cally, Conjunctions may be said to connect* Propositions. 

§ 470. If so, in order to understand how many dif- 
ferent kinds of Conjunctions can exist, we must know all 
the ways in which one proposition may be connected 
with another. Many propositions are wholly uncon- 
nected. Propositions delivered at long intervals, or by 
different persons, have, for the most part, no relation 
to each other. In consecutive conversation, however, 
one statement is connected with another. Thus — 

I am pleased, 


This has happened ; 


I should have been disappointed, 


It had falleli out otherwi^e^ 


I think 


Mj friends will be more surprised 


Satisfied with the arrangement. 

* That Conjunctions connect Terms is beyond all doubt ; and, when 
the Terms thus connected belong to different Propositions, they connect 
(Jthrough such terms) different Propositions. Whether, however, they 
connect two or more terms within the same Proposition is a point which 
is disputed. This is a question far too wide and complex for inveatiga- 
tion in such a work ns the present. Contrary to his earlier opinion the 
writer thinks that, in some exceptional instances, it is Ttrma rather 
than Propositions which the Conjunction connects. Thus All men are 
black or white cannot be expanded into two propositions without orer- 


§ 471. Copulatives and Disjunctives.^— Conjun^ 
tions which connect two or more Terms are called Co- 
pulative ; as and. 

Conjunctions which connect one of two Terms are 
called Disjunctive; as or. Disjunctives are either true 
Disjimctives or Subdisjunctives. A true Disjunctive 
separates things. When we say the sun or the inoon 
is shining^ we separate two diflFerent objects, one of 
which shines by day, the other by night. Subdisjunc- 
tives separate names. When we say Victoria^ or the 
Queen of England^ is our sovereign, we speak of the 
same object, under different names. 

§ 472. The idea expressed by a Copulative may be 
strengthened and made clearer by the addition of the 
words each, both, all, or the like. Thus, we may say 
(both) sun and moon are shining, and Venus, Jupiter, 
and the Dogstar are (all) visible. 

The idea expressed by a Disjunctive may be strength- 
ened and made clearer by the addition of either. We 
may say {either) the sun or the moon is shining. 

The idea expressed by a Subdisjunctive may be 
strengthened and made clearer by the phrase in other 
words. We may say Queen Victoria, (in other tuords) 
the Queen of England, &c. 

In all these cases, the words both, &c., either, &c., 
and in other words, &e., are no true Conjimctions. 
They strengthen the Conjunction. The Conjunction, 
however, exists without them. 

§ 473. Or and either have their corresponding Ne- 
gatives — nor and neither. I wHl either come or send 
is right. So is / will neither come nor send. But I 
will neither come or send is wrong. 

When a question is asked, whether takes the place 
of either. 

Words like eitKer axe^ genex^llY treated as Conjunc- 


tions. This, however, they are not. The most that can 
be said of them is that they form part of certain Con- 
jmictional expressions. They never stand alone. Mean- 
while the words with which they correspond, can, as a 
general rule, do without them. We say this or that^ 
mine or his, quite as correctly as (either) this or that, 
(neither) mi/ne nor his. If then, they are not conjunc- 
tions, what are they ? Both is decidedly a Pronoun. 
Either J however, neither and whether, seem to be both 
Pronouns and Adverbs. When either means on^ out of 
two, it is a Pronoun. When it means in the way of 
an alternative, it is an Adverb. 

§ 474. Other Conjunctions are Causal, Illative, and 

Causals give the cause of a given eflFect. 

The day is warm 

The sun shines. 

niatives give the eflFect of a given cause. 

The sun shines, 


The day is warm. 


T%e night will befim 

the stars shine. 

Than implies Comparison. But is Adversative. 

§ 475. Qovemment of Conditional Conjunctions. 
— Conditional Conjunctions govern the Subjunctive 
Mood. The chief Conditional is if. To say if the 
sun shines the day will he clear is not considered such 
good English e^ if the sun shinCj &c. 

Although the word if is the type and specimen of 
the conditional conjunction, there are «e^^T«i ^W^^^^r^ 


80 closely related to it in meaning as to agree with it 
in requiring a subjunctive mood to follow them. 

1. Except I be by Silvia in the night, 
There is no music in the nightingale. 

2. Let us go and sacrifice to the Lolti our God lest he/aU upon ns 
with pestilence. 

3. Let him not go lest he die, 

4. He shall not eat of the holj thing unless he wash his flesh with 

5. Although my house be not so with God. 

6. — Kevenge back on Kevenge itself recoils. 
Let it. I reck not so it light well aimed. 

7. Seek out his wickedness till thou find none. 

And 80 on with before^ ere, as long ow. 

On the other hand, the word if itself is not always^ 
or, at least, not always equally conditional ; conditional 
conjunctions being of two sorts : — 

1. Those which express a condition as an actual 
fact, and one admitted as such by the speaker : 

2. Those which express a condition as a possible 
fact, and one which the speaker either does not admit, 
or admits only in a qualified manner. 

Since tlve children are so badly brought up, &c, — 
This is an instance of the first construction. The 
speaker admits, as an actual fact, the bad bringing-wp 
of the children. 

If the children be so badly brought-up, &c. — This 
is an instance of the second. The speaker admits as a 
possible (perhaps as a probable) fact the bad bHnginfj- 
up of the children ; but he does not adopt it as an in- 
dubitable one. 

Now, if every conjimction had a fixed unvariable 
meaning, there would be no difficulty in determining 
whether a condition were absolute and beyond doubt, or 
possible and liable to doubt. But such is not the case. 

If may precede propositions wherein there is so 


little doubt implied that it may be treated as equiva- 
lent to ai/nce ; in which case it is fitly followed by the 
Indicative Mood. 

Hence we must look to the meaning of the sentence 
in general, rather than to the particular coDJ unction 

As a point of practice, the following method of de- 
termining the amount of doubt expressed in a con- 
ditional proposition is useful: — Insert, immediately 
after the conjunction, one of the two following phrases 
— (1) 08 is the case; (2) as may or may not be the 
case. By ascertaining which of these two supplements 
expresses the meaning of the speaker, we ascertain the 
mood of the verb which follows. 

When the first formula is the one required, there is 
no element of doubt, and the verb should be in the 
indicative mood. If (as is the case) he is gone^ I 
must follow him. Here if = since. 

When the second formula is the one required, there 
is an element of doubt, and the verb should be in the 
subjunctive mood. If (as may or may not be the case) 
he be gonCj I mvst follow him. 

§ 476. Than and But, — No conjunction governs a 
case. When a word governs a case, be it ever so like a 
conjunction, it is not one in reality. It is a prepo- 

Than follows adjectives and adverbs of the compa- 
rative degree ; as this is better than that. 

Than is, in respect to its etymology, neither more 
nor less than then. It is not difficult to see the connec- 
tion in sense between such sentences as / like thin 
better than I like that^ and / like this — then {after- 
wards or next in order) Hike that. 

Than is sometimes treated as a preposition when it 
governs a case. 


Thou art a girl as much fairer than her 
As he was a poet sublimer than we. — Prior, 
You are a much greater loser than me. — Suftft. 

It is better, however, to make it a conjunction, ia 
which case the noun which follows it depends upon the 
Verb of the antecedent clause. 1. / like you better than 
he=I like you better than he likes you. 2. / like yov, 
better than him=I like you better than I like him. 

But J in respect to its etymology, is be-utan^hy 
out. It is not difficult to see the connection in sense 
between such sentences as all but one^ and ail without 
(or except) one. 

Buty then, is a Preposition and an Adverb, as well 
as a Conjunction. Prepositional Construction. — They 
all ran away but me. i.e. eaxept me. Conjunctional 
Construction. — They all ran away but I, i.e. but I did 
not run away. 

Copulatives, Disjunctives, and Subdisjxmctives must 
be considered in respect to the Number of the verb 
with which they come in contact. Copulatives always 
require a plural verb. 

§ 477. The Concord of Persons. — A difficulty that 
occurs frequently in the Latin language is rare in Eng- 
lish. In expressions like ego et ille, followed by a verb, 
there arises a question as to the person in which that 
verb shall be used. Is it to be in the first person in 
order to agree with egOy or in the third in order to 
agree with iUe ? For the sake of laying down a rule 
upon these and similar points, the classical grammari- 
ans arrange the Persons (as they do the Genders) ac- 
cording to their dignity, making the Verb agree with 
the most worthy. In respect to persons, tie first is 
more worthy than the second, and the second more 
worthy than the third. Hence, they said — 

Ego et Balbus sttstulimus manus. 
Ta et Balbua mutuiUlU TCAXixia. 





Now, in English, the plural form is the same for all 
hree persons. Hence we say / and yow are friemds^ 
^ov, and I are friends^ I and he are friends^ &c., so 
hat for the practice of language, the question as to the 
elative dignity of the three persons is a matter of in- 
lifference. Nevertheless, it may occur, even in English. 
iThenever two or more pronouns of different persons, 
uid of the svngular number, follow each other disjunO' 
ively, the question of concord arises. I or you — yaw 
yr he — he or I. I believe that, in these cases, the rule 
a as follows : 

1. Whenever the word dther or neither precedes the 
}ronouns, the verb is in the third person. Either you 
Yr lis in the wrong — neither you n^or I is in the wrong. 
[n this case either is a pronoun, and means one of us 

2. Whenever the disjunctive is simple, Le. unac- 
companied with the word either or n/eUher^ the verb 
igrees with the^r«^ of the two pronouns. 

loT heam in the wrong. 
HeoT lis in the wrong. 
Thou or he art in the wrong. 
• He or thou is in the wrong. 

§ 478. The Concord of Tenses. — ^When that signi- 
ies intention, the Verb which follows must be in the 
ame Tense as the Verb which precedes it. 

I* Ido this that I may succeed. 
2. I did this that I might sncceec.. 

This is a Concord of Tense. 

I I 

482 C0NC0BD6 Of THE 




§ 479. The Concords of the Relative and Ant^ 
cedent. — ' Relative ' and ^Antecedent ' are words of which 
either one implies the other. There is no Relative 
without an Antecedent ; and no Antecedent without a 

As the Relative, in respect to its import, is simply 
the Antecedent under another name, the two words 
must be of the same Grender and the 8am6 Number ; so 
that Oender and Nuiiiber are the two Concords of the 
Relative and the Antecedent. In these they rmLst agree. 

In the matter of Caaej however, there is no such 
necessary agreement ; for the man or woman, the person 
or thing, or the men or women, &c., that are agents in 
one clause may be the objects of the action in the other. 
In * I trust John ' — John is the object. In * John trusts 
me ' — John is the agent. 

§ 480. The Antecedent may appear in either the 
Subject or the Predicate, as He steals trash who steals 
my purse — I punished him wfio stole my purse. 

§ 481. The arrangement of the clauses is not ne- 
cessarily linear ; i.e. tiiey need not precede and follow 
one another ; though in the preceding they have done 
so. They might, however, have run — he, who steals 
my purse, steals trash — himij who stole my purse, I 

§ 482. Neither is it necessary that both the Rela- 
tive and the Antecedent should be used. In phrases 
like the books I want are come the Relative, in Who 
steals my purse steals trash the Antecedent, is omit- 


ted. For a fuller notice of the omission of the Rela- 
tive^ see Abbott^ &c. 244. 

§ 483. Attraction. — ^This is a term of the same 
kind as Ellipsis and Pleonasm ; for it is a name of 
one of those processes by which the ordinary rules for 
the Concords are disturbed. One of these Concords is, 
as we have seen, that between the Selative and the Ante- 
cedent; and the process that disturbs it is named 
Attraction. Though Attraction plays a part in the 
explanation of certain irregular constructions in Eng- 
lish, the English is not the best language for explain- 
ing its nature and operation. A familiar example will 
best illustrate it. The Greek for 1 use is ;^/iat ; for 
book ^ipKtov ; for which, oh is the Dative, and h the 
Accusative Pliural. For / have the Greek is rj^cD. But 
yp&fitu governs a Dative Case, f^^co an Accusative. In 
what case then will the Relative Pronoim which be 
when we translate I use the books which I have ? The 
answer is plain. It will be in the case which is 
governed by the word corresponding with have, and 
not in that which is governed by the word correspond- 
ing with use. Hence the translation should be 'xp&fuiL 
l3ifiKioi9 h ixo^. Instead of this, however, it is xp^M'O^ 
fiipklois oh ixo^» But the disturbance is readily re- 
ferred to its cause. 

The regimen, or government, of the Antecedent 
extends itself to, or oMracts the Relative. And that 
very naturally, inasmuch as the Relative and the Ante- 
cedent equally apply to the same object. 

§ 484. Attraction and Ellipsis. — Along with this 
influence in the way of Attraction we should consider 
the fact noticed in § 482 ; viz. that of the omission of one 
of Uie two elements now under notice ; and having done 
this, proceed to analyze such sentences as the following : 

iz 2 


tions Tinder which we expect Attraction lie on the sur- 
fiace and are conspicuously visible. 

But when It is I either constitutes the whole sen- 
tence, or has no Relative to follow it, the conditions of 
Attraction are anything but conspicuous. However, 
it is only in appearance that they are wanting. There 
is always a second clause implied ; and, in it, an im- 
expressed Eelative. The bearing of this is, manifestly, 
upon the debateable question as to the propriety of 
the (so called) Accusative m«, in the combination It is 
Tne^It is L When this answers the question What is 
that ? the answer may consist of a single word, viz. / 
or me, as the case may be. The arguments against the 
latter phrase lie on the surface, and there has never 
been a want of grammarians who have insisted upon 
them with all the zeal that conviction can engender. 
On the other hand the vulgarism, as it has been called, 
has foimd able defenders : one of the best arguments 
in its favour being the fact of vulgarity. It is, without 
doubt, a pure spontaneous growth of the English lan- 
guage when independent of the influence of the gram- 
marian. It is something more even than this ; for it 
is French as well as English — and that to a greater 
extent. In French c'est mx)i absolutely excludes dcst 
je. Yet It is me is not a Gallicism. It is the result, 
as has been suggested, of Attraction ; though whether 
it is always so in English or whether it is ever so in 
French is another question. 

§ 486. Another way by wliich the use of the (so-called) Accasative 
can be defended lies in the likelihood of its being no AccuFatiye at all : 
for it does not follow that because / is the Nominatiye, Me may not 
be Nominative also. The one by no means excludes the other. Neither 
is a second form superfluous. The difference, in the matter of its in- 
flection, between the Adjective when it constitutes a Predicate, and the 
A^jectire when it is in the ordinary state of construction, has already 
been noticed; and it it not too much to say that the Predicatitft 


Construction like the influence of Attraction is one of snffident impor> 
tance to be recognized as an element of criticism. 

Hence, there may be two kinds of me in the place of I — one brought 
about by Attraction, and one the result of the Fredicatire construction 

Caution, — ^It does not follow that because Itia m$ may be justified,, 
we can also say It is Aim, It is her^ It is them, though the conditions of 
the Attraction are the same. In hini, her, and them we have positive 
signs of an oblique case ; and this naturally checks rather than faTours 
the Attractional influence. On the other hand, / has no signs of any- 
thing, and consequently fEiYours rather than checks it. It is not denied 
that him, her, and them may take the place of he, she, and they. It is 
only suggested that they do not do it so readily as me takes the place 

§ 487. It is I your master whOj &c. — ^The Personal 
Pronouns, especially the First and Second, are, so to 
say, essentially Personal; and, when they stand by 
themselves before a Verb, there is no doubt as to the 
Person in which the Verb should be used. I commaTid 
and he commands are as manifestly right as / com-- 
mxmds and he command are wrong. But ordinary 
Substantives are, when they stand alone, of the third 
Person ; so that just as we say he commands you, we 
also, say your master commands you. Your master 
command you is wrong ; and I commands is no better. 

What, then, is the construction when the Pronoun 
J, or thou, is put in Apposition with such a Substan- 
tive as master ? With which should the verb which 
follows agree in respect to Person ? Should we say It 
is /, your master, who command you, or It is I, 
your master, who commands you. 

Here the Verb in the second clause is governed 
neither by the Personal Pronoun, /, nor the Substantive 
Toaster, but by the Eelative Who ; and this means — 
with which, out of the two antecedents (7 and Truister), 
does the Selative agree ? 

Tliere are so many ways of looking upon this ques- 


tion, which is by no means one of much practical im- 
portance, that it is more of a crnix gramTnatica than 
aught else. The purely formal view of the matter I 
believe to depend upon the view we take of the Person 
of the ordinary Substantive. In ninety-nine cases out 
of a himdred — perhaps in nine hundred and ninety-nine 
out of a thousand — it is in the Third Person ; and, when 
this is the case, the notion that they are naturally 
more akin to he, she^ and itj than to / and Thou, pre- 
sents itself spontaneously. In reality, however, they 
are of no Person at all, until they are used either in 
the place of, or in apposition with, one of their 
determinant Pronouns; hence, when we say / your 
master, thou my master, he our mxister, &c., there 
is, in reality, no conflict, in the way of Person, between 
the Pronoun and the Substantive. They are both 
names of the same objects, i.e. the speaker, the person 
(or object) spoken to, or the person (or object) spoken 
about. Hence, words like master are only of the third 
person when they stand alone, or with he, she, or it be- 
fore them. They are, however, so often in this predi- 
cament that it not only seems as if they were so essen- 
tially ; but it is somewhat difl&cult to conceive them 
otherwise. Yet, if the doctrine of this notice be true, 
Tnaster, so long as it is in apposition with /, is of the 
same person as 7. If so, expressions like it is I, your 
ffiaster, who commands you, are only excusable — excu- 
sable on the ground of the apposition being, to some 
extent, concealed, or over-ruled. 

The true Apposition is that of master and I — ^both 
names of the speaker; with which one is as good a 
First Person as the other. This is a Concord. But 
Concords, as we have seen, are pre-eminently liable to 
disturbing causes. Attraction, as we have seen, may, 
undoubtedly, disturb them. 


Special afl&nities in the way of import may disturb 
them, e,g. in the verb command and the substantive 
master (i.e. comm/inder\ there is a connection in sense 
which may over-rule that of / as a Personal Pronoun. 
And, above all, there are differences which may disturb 
the formal connection in the way of stress, emphasis, or 
accent, between the two antecedents which are con- 
cealed in written, and only recognised in spoken lan- 
guage. In short it is scarcely possible to say when the 
one construction prevails over the other. 

§ 488. In combinations like Solomxm^ the son of 
David, who built the Temple, the first four words must 
be treated as a single name, otherwise David is the 
builder ; the Eelative, as a rule, referring to the noun 
which it most immediately follows. 



§ 489. Questions are either Direct or Oblique. * 

Direct— Who is he? 

Oblique. — ^Who do you say that ho is ? 

Between the combined effects of Ellipsis and Attrac- 
tion the Syntax of the oblique question is somewhat 
irregular. With the Substantive there is no prac- 
tical difficulty, but with the Pronouns who and whom, 
the Accusative and Nominative Cases diflFer in form, 
and, so doing, claim special attention. Difficulties in 
constructions of this kind are best investigated by 
framing the answer to them, and noting the character 

inBGATIYES. 489 

of the Verb. Where it is transitive the pronoun that 
follows it will be in the Accusative, when it is the Verb 
Substantive it will be in the Nominative Case. 

Whom do you say that they seek ? 
I say that they seek him. 
Who do yon say that John is ? 
I say that John is he^ &c. 

Less accurately — 

And he axed hem and seide, whom seien the people that lam ? Thei 
answereden and seiden, Jon Baptist — and he seide to hem, But whom 
■eien ye that I am ? — ^Wtcliffe, Luke ix. 

Tell me in sadness whom she is you love. 

Romeo and Juliet^ i. 1. 

And as John fulfilled hid course, he said, whom think ye that I am ? — 

Acts xiii. 25. 

§ 490. Tea and Ko are, perhaps, words sufficiently 
peculiar to justify us in treating them as a separate 
Part of Speech ; for it may be observed that, unlike 
any word hitherto noticed, they constitute a whole 
Proposition by themselves. Ye8=it is, while no=it 
is not. At the same time, they depend upon what has 
preceded, for unless a question has been asked how is 
an answer to be given ? There is nothing to reply to. 

§ 491. When the Copula precedes the Predicate, 
the question is Categorical, and its answer is Yea or No. 
Question. la John at koine ? Answer. Yea or iVb, as 
the case may be. 

When the Predicate precedes the Copula the question 
is Indefinite, and the answer may be anything what- 
ever. To where ia John ? we may answer o^ home, 
abroadj in the garden, m London, I do not know, 
&c., &c. 

§ 492. In all questions there is a transposition of 
the terms. In what ia thia ? the word what is the 
Predicate. Yet it begins the sentence. In are you 

490 QUEsnoNs of appeal. 

at home ? the word arCj though it begins the sentence, 
is a Copula. 

§ 493. Questions of Appeal. — A question to which 
no answer can be given is much the same as a N^^- 
tive. A person who, in extreme perplexity, says what 
am I to do? really means I know not what to do* 
These are called Questions of Appeal. 

Or hear^st thou rather pore setherial stream 
Whose fountain who can tell ? 

Here, who = no one, and is a secondary interrogation 
superadded to the main one expressed by hear^st thou. 
The English (for the construction as it stands is Greek) 
of the extract is or art thou called a pure cetherial 
strea/m whose fountain no one hnoivs ? 

§ 494. What may be called the distribution of the 
negative is pretty regular in English. Thus, when the 
word n/)t comes between an indicative, imperative, or 
subjunctive mood and an infinitive verb, it almost 
always is taken with the word which it follows — I can 
not eat may mean either 7 can — not eat {i.e. I can ah- 
8tain)j or / can not — eat (i.e. I am unable to eat) ; 
but, as stated above, it almost always has the latter 

But not always. In Byron's Deformed Transformed 
we find the following lines : — 

Clay ! not dead, but soulless, 
Though no mortal man would choose thes, 

An immortal no less 
Deigns not to refuse thee. 

Here not to refuse=to accept; and is probably a 
Grecism. To not refuse would, perhaps, be better. 

The next expression is still more foreign to the 
English idiom : — 

Yet not to have been dipped in Lethe's lake 
Could save the son of Thetis from to die. 


Here not is to be taken with could. 

In the present English, two negatives make an affir- 
mative. / have not not seen him=:I have seen him. 
In Greek this was not the case. Dues aut plwrea negor 
tivcB apud Orcecoa vehementi/us negant is a well-known 
rule. The Anglo-saxon idiom differed from the Eng- 
lish and coincided with the Greek. The French nega- 
tive is only apparently double ; words like pointy pas, 
do not mean not, but at alL Je 7i6 parle pas^^I Tiot 
speak at all, not I not apeak not 

§ 495. When a Finite Verb is accompanied by a 
Negative, the Negative follows, and the Verb precedes : 
as Jie apoke not, he moved not, never he not apoke, or 
he not mx)ved. This rule is absolute ; though in many 
cases it looks as if it were otherwise. In expressions 
like not to advance ia to retreat the negative stands 
first. But to advance is not a Finite Verb. It is rather 
a Noun. Again in he doea not advance, &c., the case is 
the same. But the verb, again, is other than Finite. 
The true peculiarity of the Negative construction is 
that, except for the purposes of either metre or rhe- 
toric, it prefers the circumlocution of do to the use of 
the simple Verb ; as I do not aay ao rather than I aay 
not ao. Hence the Verb to which the negative belongs 
is do ; and this, as the rule requires, it foUowa. The 
difference between / cannot eat, and / can — not eaJt has 
just been indicated. 

Wallis's rule, which is quite as absolute as the pre- 
sent one, is to the same effect. It must be understood, 
however, to treat the Indeterminate Verb as other than 

Adyerbinm negandi non {noi) verbo poetponitur (nempe auxiliari 
primo n adsit; aut si non adsit anxiliare Terbo principal!): alili tamea 
oiatioma partibas pnefigi solet. 

P. 113. 


§ 496. The Reciprocal Conatmction. — ^In all sen- 
tences containing the statement of a reciprocal or 
mutual action there are in reality two assertions: one 
that A. strikes (or loves) B. ; and another that B. 
strikes (or loves) A. Hence, if the expression exactly 
coincided with the fact signified, there would always be 
two full propositions. This, however, is not the habit 
of language. Hence arises a more compendious form 
of expression, giving origin to an ellipsis of a peculiar 
kind. Phrases like Eteocles and Polynices killed each 
other are elliptic, for Eteocles and Polynices killed 
— ea^h the other. Here the second proposition expands 
and explains the first, whilst the first supplies the verb 
to the second ; so that each clause is elliptic. The first 
is without the object, the second without the verb. 
That the verb must be in the plural number, that one 
of the nouns must be in the nominative case, and the 
other in the objective, is self-evident from the structure 
of the sentence. 

This is the syntax. As to the power of the words 
each and one, I am not prepared to say that in the 
common practice of the English language there is any 
distinction between them. A distinction, however, if it 
existed, would give precision to our language. Where 
two persons performed a reciprocal action, the expres- 
sion might be, one another ; as, Eteocles and Polynices 
killed one another. Where more than two persons 
were engaged on each side of a reciprocal action, the 
expression might be, each other; as, the ten champions 
praised each other. This amoimt of perspicuity is at- 
tained, by different processes, in the French, Spanish, 
and Scandinavian languages. 

(1.) French. — H^ (i. e, A. and B.) se hattaient — 
Vun r autre. Us (A. B. C.) se hattaient — les uns les 


(2.) In Spanish, uno otro=Pun Vautre^ and unoa 
ctro8=^le8 una lea autrea. 

(3.) Danish.— jETinanderrr: the French Pun V autre; 
whilst hverandre=lea una lea autrea. 



§ 497. Coinpoaition. — Compoaition ia the joining 
togethevj vn language^ of two different worda, treated 
aa a avngle term. Observe the following elements in 
this definition — 

1. In language. — ^Words like merry-making are 
divided by the hyphen. Now, it is very plain that if 
all words apelt with a hyphen were to be considered as 
compounds, the formation of them would be not a 
matter of speech or language^ but one of writing or 
spelling. This distinguishes compounds in language 
from mere printers' compounds. 

2. Different. — In words like tomtom^ bonbon, a'elp^ 
adpo {aelf-^ame) we have the junction of two words, 
though not of two different ones. This gives us gemi- 
nation, or dovhli/ng, rather than true composition. 

3. Worda. — In faXherr-a, clear-er, four-th, &c., there 
is the addition of a letter or a syllable, and it may be 
even of the part of a word. There is no addition, how- 
ever, of a whole one. This distinguishes composition 
from d&rivaticm. 

4. Treating the combination aa a aingle term. — In 
the eyes of one grammarian the term m/mntain height 
may be as truly a compound as aunbeam. In the eyes 


of another it may be no compound, but two words like 
Alpine height. 

It is in the determination of differences of this 
kind that the Accent plays an important part. 

Compare such a word as blue bottle in the combina- 
tion bluebottle fiy, or such a one as blu&'Stockmg^:^ 
learned female with blue bdttle, and blue stdckmg as 
separate words. Compare, also, bldchUrd, meaning a 
bird that is blacky with blackbird the Latin merula ; or 
blue bell, meaning a bdl that is blue, with bluebell^ the 
flower. Expressions like a sharp, idged instrument, 
meaning an instrument that is sharp and has edges, 
as opposed to a sharp-edged^ i/nstrumcTit, meaning an 
instrument with sharp edges, further exemplify this 
difference. Subject to a few exceptions, it may be laid 
down, that, in the English language, there is no com- 
position unless there be either a change of form or a 
change of accent. 

§ 498. Differences of meaning. — In a red house, 
each word preserves its natural and original meaning, 
and the statement suggested by the term is thai a 
house is red. By a parity of reasoning, a mad house 
should mean a house that is mad ; and, provided that 
each word retain its natural meaning and its natural 
accent, such is the fact. Let a house mean, as it often 
does, a family. Then the phrase, a mad house, means 
that the house or family is mad, just as a red house 
means that the house is red. Such, however, is not 
the current meaning of the word. Every one knows 
that a mad house means a house for mad men ; in 
which case it is treated as a compound word, and has a 
marked accent on the first syllable. Compared, then, 
with such words as red house, meaning a house of a 
o'ed colour, and compared with such words as mad 
house meaning a deranged family, the word, in its 


common sense, expresses a compound idea, as opposed 
to two ideas. Such is the commentary upon treating 
the combination as a single term, ; or, in other words, 
such is the diflference between a compound word and 
two words. 

§ 499. Order of elementa. — ^In compound words it 
is the first term that defines or particularises the 
secoTid. That the idea given by the word apple4ree is 
not referable to the words apple and tree^ irrespective 
of the order in which they occur, may be seen by re- 
versing the position of them. Tree-apple^ although 
not existing in the language, is as correct a term as 
tlvom^apple. In tree-apple^ the particular sort of 
apple meant is denoted by the word tree^ and if there 
were in our gardens various sorts of plants called 
appleSj of which some grew along the ground and 
others upon trees, such a word would be required in 
order to be opposed to earth-apple^ or ground-apple^ 
or some word of the kind. However, as the word is not 
current in the language, the class of compounds indi- 
cated by it may seem to be merely imaginary. Yet 
nothing is further from being the case. A tree-rose is a 
TosCj a rose-tree is a tree^ of a particular sort. A grounds 
nut is a nut particularised by growing in the groimd. 
A nut^ound is a ground particularised by producing 
nuts. A finger-Hngj as distinguished from ear-ri/ngs 
and from ri/ngs in general, is a ring for the finger. A 
rvng-finger, as distinguished from forerfingers and from 
fingers in general, is di. finger whereon ri/ngs are worn. 

§ 600. Third element in compounds. — ^It is clear, 
that in every compound there are two parts, i.e. the 
whole or part of the original, and the whole or part of 
the superadded, word. Are there ever mx/re than two ? 
Yes. There is, sometimes, a third element, viz., a vowel, 
consoDanty or syllable, that joins the first word with the 


second. In the older forms of all the German lan- 
guages the presence of this third element was the rule 
rather than the exception. In the present English it 
exists in but few words ; and that doubtfully. 

(a) The -a- in blach-OHfnoor is possibly such a con- 
necting element. 

(6) The -m- in nigkt^n-gale is, perhaps, one also. 
Compare the German form nackt^gaU, and remember 
the tendency of vowels to take the sound of -w^ 
before g. 

(c) The -8- in words like Thur-8'day^ hu/nt-a^mia'aj 
may be the same ; but it may also be the sign of the 
Possessive Case. 

§ 501. CoTYvpownd radicals. — ^Words like midship^ 
man, gentlemamUkej &c., must be treated as formations 
from a compoimd radical: and analysed thus — midr 
shijhman, gentlemavr-Wce. 

§ 502. The classification of Compoimds in respect 
to their /orm begins with the two extremes. 

At one end they pass into the ordinary combina- 
tions of the rules of Concord and Government between 
two separate words in Syntax — as Thursday =Tk(yri$ 
dies= TTior*8 day. 

At the other they pass into Derivatives ; as in the 
case of manly, as opposed to manlike. There is no 
such single word as -ly. But we know that it is only 
like in a newer form. This leads us to Etymology ; or 
the Grammar of single words. 

(1) Svhatantives preceded by Substantives; the 
first being governed by the second in the Genitive Case 
— Thur-^'day, as opposed to Sun-day ; Zarwi-s-man, 
as opposed to sea^-ma/a; headsman; sportsman, hunts- 
man, &c. 

Substantives preceded by Adjectives — blindworm, 
freeman, blackthorn, holyday, quicksilver, &c. These 


are, in Latin, ccecus anguisj Itber homo, nigra qozTio, 
Bo/acta dies, vivum argentum {argentum vivum). 

Substantives preceded by Verbs — turnspit j spitfire, 
daredevil, &c. 

Here the first element is just what it would be if 
the two words were unconnected, or even separated by 
others intervening = Thorns {sacred) day, the blimd 
(and) slow worm; spit {fiame cmd)fire, and the like. 
No word has changed either its form, or its relations in 
the way of government, nor yet its import as a Part of 
Speech, on the strength of the closeness of the contact, 
or the change of accent, which indicates its subordina- 
tion as a syllable. 

The same is nea/rly the case with the Active Parti- 
ciples of Transitive Verbs, preceded by a Substantive. 
A fruit-bearing tree differs from a tree bearing fruit 
only in the transposition of its element and the Accent. 
The government is that of an ordinary Accusative Case. 

When the first element in compounds of this kind 
is an Adjective, there is modification of the construction. 
Soft-flowing means softly rather than soft ; and corre- 
sponds with the Latin moUitei' rather than moUe. But a 
Neuter Adjective both in Latin and English, may stand 
for an Adverb : so that the difference between the Ad- 
verbial and the Adjectival construction is but nominal. 

As an Adjective, without its Substantive, is not an 
object of Government ; the verb in combinations like 
soft-flowvng is Intransitive. With Pronouns, however, 
it may be Transitive ; for a Pronoun, by itself, can be 
governed in a Case. This gives us compounds like all- 
seevng, self-supporting. 

But the Pronoun partakes of the nature of both the 
Substantive and the Adjective ; and, according to the 
extent that it inclines to one or the other, the sense 
and construction are equivocal. AUrseeing may mean 

K K 


either seeing everything, which is Substantival, or 
seeing universally, which is Adverbial and AdjectivaL 

§ 503. In the combinations which follow we have 
neither such clear cases of government as we have in 
Thursday and fruit^earing, nor such clear cases of 
Concord as we have in blindwarrru There is Govern- 
ment ; but it is of indirect and indefinite character ; 
and there is, so far as the outward form of the combi- 
nation is concerned, Apposition in the way of Concord. 
The closer contact, however, which has reduced two 
words into one has modified the import of one of the 
elements as a Part of Speech — and this is first of the 
two ; the one that particularizes, or circumscribes, the 
import of the second ; and, thirdly, the one that car- 
ries the Accent— ddy^tor, rdsetree, s^man, cdllarbane, 
sunlight, &c., &c. It is not easy to give the exact cir- 
cumlocutions which correspond with the compounds. 
They, generally, involve a Preposition, and so fta* as 
they do this may be said to be in the case that such a 
Preposition would govern. In some instances the Pr^ 
position is, perhaps, sufficiently clear for two different 
persons to agree upon it. A vrnie-cellar, for instance, 
would probably be rendered a cellar for vdne^ by nine 
speakers ou^ of ten ; and oak-tree rendered a tree thai 
is an oak. But such instances are exceptional ; though 
where we get them, we get an instance of Government 
in the first case, and of Apposition in the second. 

§ 504. The reduction of compoimds into what 
would be their equivalents, if they were decomposed 
and exhibited with the full details of their construc- 
tion, is not clear in respect to Government on the part 
of the Preposition. And it is no clearer in respect to 
that of the Verb. Indeed, it is the Verbal, rather tin 
the Verb itself, that plays any not t n 

Syntax of Compounds. 


In Composition the Verb pure and simple has a very 
limited function. As a Prefix before a Substantive, 
we find it in words like bdckbitej brdwbeat^ ddredeiril^ 
spitfire, turncoat^ turnspit, and others ; but they are 
by no means numerous. As Affixes, the Verbs are very 
rare ; for we can easily believe that when such combi- 
nations as backbite and spitfire are uncommon, trans- 
positions of them, such as biteback and firespit, are 
rarer still. Indeed, it is safe to say that when they 
exist at all, they exist only as Verbals, in -mg or -e?i 
divested of their terminations. So far then as such 
words as to stargaze, to cUerstalk, to shSepsteal, &c., 
exist, they do not so much mean to gaze oi stars, to 
9talk deer, or to steal sheep, as to play the part of a 
stargazer, a deerstalker, or a sheepsteaier, or to have 
the habit of sheepstealing, deerstalking, or stargazing. 

§ 505. Substantival Participles. — These are words 
like map-headed, tiot-headed, cold-hearted, &c., where 
the second element is a Substantive, and the first 
either a Substantive or an Adjective. Meanwhile the 
Affix is that of a Participle. 

Every object in existence, however much its name 
may be a Substantive, can be made Participial in both 
form and import by connecting it with some other to 
which it belongs as an attribute. Thus, any object, 
whether person or thing, to which a fiead or heart be- 
longs, is one which is endued with, or possessed of a 
head, a heart, or what not? In other words, it is 
headed or hearted. When these heads or hea^'ts are 
of any exceptional or peculiar character, that character 
is indicated by a Prefix. The head is moplike. The 
hsad is as a mop, or moplike when the combination is 
Substantival, and it is simply cold or Jiot when it is 
Adjectival. The object to which it belongs, or apper- 
tains, is mop'hecuied, coldJiearted, or hot-headed as the 


case may be ; and it is the object thus characterized 
that is mop-headed^ or cold-hearted. We rarely, how- 
ever, use the second element by itself, inasmuch as it 
rarely occurs to us to say that such-or-such an object has 
a head or heart purely and simply. It is only when the 
liead or heart is characterized by something diflferent 
from heads and hearts in general that we use the Par- 
ticipial affix. 

This is how pure Substantives take the form of 
Participles, and how they generally do so as compoimds. 
A cdld hearted man is one who is cold, and also has a 
heart. A cdldnhearted man is one who hxis a c6ld 
hSart. The mere fact of his having a heart at all is 
rarely enough of a characteristic to develop a Substan- 
tival Participle. 

Still, there are some words in English thus formed ; 
and, perhaps, the best known example is the much 
abused word talented; which has the misfortune of 
having been condemned by Coleridge ; who likened it 
to such words as shillinged or guineaed. This was 
good just so far as it went. Talented means endowed 
with mental accomplishments analogous to great pos- 
sessions in money, and, for this, the best equivalent was 
the name of the highest denomination in the way of 
metallic wealth. It was the most general term because 
it was the largest. 

Of simple Substantival Participles there is no 
better, because no more familiar example than landed 
in the phrase landed i/nterestj which means the interest 
determined by land^ or that of the landowners. The 
doctrine that Participial forms always imply corre- 
sponding Verbs is untenable. 

ifyoUUwoode di Co., I^rinttrt, Nev-itrtH Squart, London, 

Tsa:A.TiaTi3L 1977- 



Messrs. LONGMANS, GREEN, and CO 


History^ Politics^ Historical Memoirs^ &c. 

CinJBCil« Dean of St. Panl'?. 1 vol. cro\ra 8vo. [3>ar/jr ready. 

The EASIEBH QUESTION. By the Rer. Malcolm MacColl, M A. 
8to. [A'earijf rtadif. 

Th« KISTOET of EVOLAKD from the Fall of WoUey to the Defeat 
of the 8l»ni>li Armada. By Jamss AnrBOVT Fboudc, !!.▲. lata Fellow 
e( Bnter OoUege, Oxford. 

LiBRABT BomoK, Twelve Volnmes, Sro. price £8. 18«. 
OABoner Bdrion, Twelye Volomet, crown 8vo. price TSi. 

By JAxn Ainsoirr Fboudc, M.A. late Fellow of Kxefcer OoUege, Oxford. 
S Tols. 8to. price 48«. 

T^ KISTOET of ENGLAND from the Accession of James the Second* 
By Lord Naoaulat. 

BrusoR's Bnrnoir, S Tola, crown 8to. 13«. 
PaopuT s BornoN, 4 toU. crown 8to. 18«. 
OABDOcr Bornox, 8 toU. post 8to. 48«. 
Ldbabt BDinoN, 6 Tola. 8to. §A, 

LOBD XACAULATS WOEKS. Complete and Uniform Library 
Bditkm. Bdlted \if hii Slater, Lady Trxykltait. 8 Tola. 8vo. with Portrait , 
price 48. U* doth, or A8. 8«. boond in tree-calf \tj BiTltee. 

DfTdopinent, and Practical Operation. By Alphxus Todd, Librarian of the 
LegidatiTO AjMmhIy of Canada. 2 Tola. 8to. price £1. 17«. 

sion of George in. 1760—1860. By Blr Thomas BnsKiini Mat, K.03. D.CL. 
The fifth Bditlon, thoronghly reriaed. 8 toU. orown 8to. price 18«. 

DBMOCBACT in EITEOPE: a History. By Sir Thoicas EnsKDri 
Mat, K.O.B. D.0J:<. STola.8TO. UnOntfrtu, 

WILLIAM lY. By the late Crarlbi C. F. Qrktillx, Bsq. Edited 1^ Hkvbt 
BiXTa,Biq. Fifth Edition. 8 Tola. 8to. 86«. 



DTBIAV POLITT ; a View of the Sj8t«m of AdmiBistrataon in India. 
"Bf LfenteMuit-Ckdonttl Qbobob Chesnst, Fellow of the Univsnity of Oaloatta. 
8to. with Hap, 31«. 

Tha KI8T0BT of PBTJ88IA, from the Earliest Times to the Present 
Bay ; tauing the Origin and Development of her Military Organiaation. By 
OipCain W. J. Wtatt. Vols. I. and n. a.d. 700 to a.d. 16S0. 8to. 86<. 

Th« CHILDHOOD of the EH0LI8H KiLTIOK ; or, the Beginnings 
of English History. By Elul S. Abiotagb. Fop. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

POPVLAB HI8T0BT of FBAVCE, from the Earliest Times to the 
Death of Looia XIY. By Euzabkth M. Skwbll, Author of 'Amy Herbert' kc 
With 8 Coloored M^jM. Crown 8to. 7«. 6d. 

BmnoN, aathorlaed and complete. Grown Syo. 8«. M, 

QABDnrr BofnoK, 4 toIi. poet 8vo. 2U. I LniuRT Bmnoir, 8 toIs. 8to. 86«. 
PaonJi'8 BDRioir, 2 toIs. crown 8to. 8<. | aruoairr^B Enrnoir, 1 toL cr. 8vo. U, 

HI8T0BT of BVBOPEAN M0BAL8, from Angnstos to Charlemagne. 
9i]rW.B.H.LMiT, H«A. Third Edition. 8 toIs. crown 8to. price 16«. 

EI8T0BT of the BI8E and IHPLITENCB of the 8PIBIT ef 

BATIONALIBH in EUROPE. By W. E. H. Lukt, M.A. Fourth BdiUoa. 
S Tola, oiown 8to. price IS*, 


By HcBXBT HowB Bangboft. 6 toIs. 8vo. with Mape, £6. 6*, 

EI8T0BT of the M0HO0L8 from the Ninth to the Ninoteonth Gen- 
tuxy. By Hbnrt H. Howorth, F.SA. Vol. I. the Mongol* Proper and the 
Xalmuk*; with Two Coloured Maps, fioyol 8yo. 38«. 

Th# KI8T0BT of PHILOSOPHY, from Thalea to Comte. By 
Gaoan Hbtot Lbwbb. Fourth Edition. 3 vols. 8to. 82«« 

Oox, M JL late Scholar of Trinity College, Oxford, 8 TOls. 8to. 38«. 

TALB8 of ANGIEBT OBEEGE. By Gbobob W. Cox, HUL late 
Bobolar of Trinity College, Oxford. Crown 8to. pxioe t*, 94, 

KISTOBT of QIYILISATIOH in England and France, Spain and Scot- 
taad. By Henbt Thoicas Bucklb. Latest Edition d the entire Work, with 
a oomplete Ibdbx. 8 toIs. crown 8to. 34«. 

8XBT0H of the HI8T0BT of the GHTTBCH ef EHOLAHD to tk% 

BenrolnfelMi of 1888. By the Bight Rot. T. V. Shobt, D.D. sometime Bishop ef 
St. Anph. Eighth Edition. Crown 8to. 7*. M. 

BP0CH8 of ANGIEKT HI8T0BT. Edited by the Kev. G. W. Cox, 
ICA. and jointly by C. Sakkbt. M.A. Ten Volumes, each complete in itself, 
in fqp. 8to. with Haps and Indices :— 

Beerlt's Gracchi, Marius, and SoIIa, 2*, Bd. 

Capbs's Age of the Antonines, 2*. M. 

Capb8*8 Early Roman Empire, 2*. Qd, 

Cox's Athenian Empire, 2*. 6d, 

Cox's Greeks and Persians, 24. M, 

Ourtbib'b Rise of the Macedonian Empire, 2*, M. 

Ihkb'b Rome to its Capture by the Gauls, 2*. td, 

IfBBiyALB'B Roman Triumrirates, 2*. id. 

SA2naET*B Spartan and Theban Supremacy. ) » .j^ ttr*^*. 

Surra's Rome and Carthage, the Punic Wars, j '" *"* '^^ 

A 3 


EPOCHS of MOOERK HI8T0BT. Edited bj E. E. Mobbis, M.A. 
J. S. Phillpotts, B.C Jj. and C. Golbrck, M. A. Eleven volamss now pabliflhed, 
each complete in itself, in fcp. 8yo. with Haps on! Index : — 

Cox's Crnsades, 2s. M. 
Crsiohton's Age of EUzabeth, 3«. 6^. 
Gairdnkb's Houses of Lancaster and York, 2j:. 6i. 
Oardixbb's Puritan Berolution, 2i. M. 
Gardinkb's Thirty Tears* War, 2<. $<f . 
HALif B Fall of the Stuarts, 2«. M, 
Ludlow's War of Amerioan Independence, 2t, $d, 
Morbib's A^ of Queen Anne, 2s. 6d, 
Skebohx's Protestant Berolution, 2$. Bd. 
8X0888*8 Early Plantagenets, S«. M, 
Wabbubtoh's Edward III. 2s. dd. 

*«* Other Epochs in preparation, in continuAtion of the Series. 

ESALITIE8 of IBI8H LIFE. By W. Stbuart Trbkcr, late Luid 
Agent in Irelwid to the Marquess of Lansdowne, the Marquess of Bath, ud 
Lord Digby. Cheaper Edition. Crown 8to. price 2s. 9d, 

XAITHDEB'S HI8T0EICAL TBEA8irBT; General Introdactory Ont- 
Uhes of Unirenal History, and a aeries of Separate Historiea. Latest Iditta, 
Xeriaed by the Bev. G. W. Cox, MjL Fop. 8to. 6s, cloth, or 10«. 64. calf. 


HISTOBICAL and BIOGBAFHICAL. 8to. price 42«. 

Biographical Works. 

The LIFE and LETTEE8 of LOEO XACATTLAT. By his Nephew. 
G. Ono Trstsltan, M.P. Second Edition, with Additions and Correctioni. 
8 Tola. 8to. with Portrait, price 86f. 

The LIFE of 8IE WILLIAM FAISBAIEK, Bart. F.E.8. Corre- 
sponding Member of the National Institute of France, kc Partly written bj 
himself ; edited and completed by William Pole, F.B.S. 8yo. Portrait, 18a 

By Heuek ZDOfXBK. Post 8vo. with Portrait, 7s. 6d. 

The LIFE and LETTEES of MOZAET. Translated from the German 
Biography of Dr. Ludwio Nohl by Lady Wallace. 2 Yok. poet 8vo. with 
Portraits of Mozart and his Sister. [^Vmr/y rfady. 


LAND, and Letters from 1833 to 1847. Translated by Lady Wallace. With 
Portrait, 2 toIs. crown 8yo. &s. each. 

The LIFE of BOBEET FEAMPTOE, D.D. Bishop of Gloucester, 
deprived as a Non- Juror in 1689. Edited by T. Simpson Evanh, M. A. Vicar of 
Shoreditch. Crown 8to. Portrait, 10s. 6d. 

ATITOBIOOEAPET. By John Stuart Mill. Bvo. price 7«. 6d. 

The LIFE of HAPOLEOH III. derived from State Records, Unpublished 
FamQy Oorrsspondence, and Personal Testimony. By Blaxchard Jxrrold. 
4 Tols. 8to. with nnmerons Portraits and Facsimiles. Voi^. I. and II. price 18i. 
each. The Third Volnme is in the press. 

OoBirwALLis Obmhxt, Lientenant-Ookmel in the Boyal Engineers. 8to. 12s. M. 

The MEM0IE8 of 8IE JOHH EEEE8BT, of Thrybeigh, Bart. M.P. 
fbr York, &c. 1684—1689. Written by Himself. Edited from the Original 
Manuscript by Jamb J. Cabtwbiobt, M.A. 8to. price SU. 


AKC CASAITBOir, 1559-1614. Bj Mabx Pathson, Bector of 
Ljnooln College, Oxford. 8to. 18«« 

SADSB8 of PUBLIC OPHnOK in IBELAND; Swift, Flood, 
Ormttan, lad 0*0011X1611. By W. B. H. Lbokt, UM New Bdition, rerlaed and 
anluged. Chrown 8to. price 7«. B<L 

[OnOKABT of OBVEBAL BIOOBAPHT; containing Concise 
Memoin and Notioea of the most Kmtnent Fenons of all CoontrieB, frcm the 
Barlieat Agea. By W. L. B. Oats8. Hedinin 8to. price Ms, 

tFE of the DITKB of WELLIHOTOB. By the Bev. G. B. Glbio, 
H. A. Popolar Bdition, cazefoUy nrlaed ; with copious Additiona. Crown Sro. 
with Portrait, 6«. 

MABflHHAH. Cabinet Bdition, with Portrait. Crown 8to. price 9*, 6A 

[CI88IT1TDES of FAMILIES. By Sir J. Bebnasd Bttbxb, CA 
Ulster King of Arms. New Bdition, enlarged. S toIs. crown 8to. Sit. 

Sir J. BnPHBN, LL.D. Cabinet Bdition. Crown 8vo. 7«. 6d. 

oonstmoted, thoroughly revised, and in peat part rewritten ; with 1.500 addi** 
ttonai Memoirs and Notices, by W. L. B. Oatk. Fcp. 8vo. ft«. cloth ; 10«. Bd. calf. 

STTEB8 and LIFE of FBAHCIS BACON, including all his Ooea- 
stonal Works. Collected and edited, with a Commentary, by J* SraDDOlOi 
Trin. CoQ. Cantab. Complete in 7 toIs. 8to. £4, it. 


William SnoAifD. S toIs. Sto. with Portrait of Heine, price tSt, 

lOOBAPHICAL and CBITICAL E8SAT8, reprinted from Beviews, 
with Additions and Corrections. Second Bdition of the Second Series. By A. 
Hatwabd, Q.C. S Tols. 8to. price 38«. TmaD Sbbub, in 1 toU 8vo. price 14*. 

Criticism^ Philosophy^ Polity^ &c. 


COMMUNITIBS ; the Rights and Duties of Nations in Time of War. By 
Sir Travkbs Twisb, D.CJi., F.B.S. Second Edition, revised. 8yo. 21«. 

lETTBOH and STATE: their relations Historically Deyeloped. Bj 
T. HxDnucH OarpcKBH, Professor of Iniernational Law in the UiuTendty of 
Strasbmg. 1 ranslated and edited with the Author's aasiBtanoe by B. Faibtaz 
Tatlob. S vols. 8vo. 4S#. 

\% IBSTITUTES of JXTSTIKIAN ; with Enelish Introduction, Trans- 
lation and Notes. By T. C. Sanoabs, M.A. 8ixt£ Bdition. 8vo. 18«. 

By SHKJX>ir AicoA, M.A. Professor of Jnrispmdanoe to the Inns of Oooxtt 
London. 8vo. price 18«. 


By Shvtjwn Amos, MJl. Profewor of Jurisprudence to the Inns of ConrK 
Second Bdition, reviited. Crowu 8vo. 64. 


i»— W— — wi^i^Wi* ■■■«■■ ■■■ » II— w>w>— — — ^ 

A SKETCH of the HI8T0BT of TAXES in EHOLAITB from the 
Earliest Times to the Present Day. By Stbphbit Dowxlu Vol. I. to the dTU 
War 1643. 8yo. lOi. 6d. 

OITTLINES of CIVIL PBOCEDITBE. Being a General \lew of the 
Sapreme C!oart of Judioatore and of the whole Praotioe in the Oommon Law and 
Chancery DivisionB Under all the Statutes now in f ocoe. By Bdwabo Staxlr 
BcecoB, BarrUter-at-taw. 12mo. price lU. 6d. ^ 


constmcted nnder the Judicature Acts, inolnding the Act of 1876 ; with Oom- 
ments on their Effect and Operation. By W. F. Fixlason. Grown 8to. lOt, Bd. 

80CBATES and the SOCBATIC SCHOOLS. Translated firom the 
German of Dr. E. Zellsr, with the Author's apinoval, by the Ber. Oswald J. 
Bkchkl, MJL, Crown 8to. New Edition in the Preas. 

Tho STOICS, EPICTTBEAirS, and SCEPTICS. Translated from the 
German of Dr. E. Zbllbb, with the Author's approval, by OswAU) J. Bbchil, 
ICA. Crown 8to. price lis, 

PLATO and the OLDEB ACADEHT. Translated from the German 
of Dr. Eduard Zsllbr by S. FaANcas Alletns and Atjhkd Goodwdt, B JL 
Fellow of Balliol CoUege, Oxford. Crown 8to. 18«. 

The ETHICS ef ABISTOTLE, with Essays and Notes. By Sir A. 
GnAMT, Bart. MJL LL.D. Third Edition. 3 toIs. 8to. S3«. 

The POLITICS of ABISTOTLE ; Greek Text, with English Notea. By 
BlOHABD OonraBBYB, MJL 8to. 19$. 

ABISTOTLFS POLITICS. Books I. HI. IV, (VII.) The Greek Text 
of Bekker, with an English Translation by W. B. Bolland, UJL, and Short 
Introductory Essays by A. Lano, M.A. Crown 8to. 7s. 6d. 

The HICOMACHEAH ETHICS of ABISTOTLE newly translated into 
English. By B. Wiluams, B.A. Fellow and late Lecturer of Merton College, 
and sometime Student of Christ Church, Oxford. 8to. U. 6d. 

ELEMENTS of LOGIC. By B. Whatblt, D.D. sometime Archbishop of 
DnbUn. 8yo. lOs, Bd, Crown 8to. 4«. 6d. 


In Two Pabts, crown 8to. 10«. Bd, Each Part may be had separately :— 

Pabt I. DedudUmt is. Pabt U. Jnduetiont Bs. Bd. 

PICTUBE LOGIC ; an Attempt to Popnlarise the Science of Beason- 
ing by the combination of Humorous Hciures with Examples of Reasoning 
taken from Daily Life. By A. Swinbourns, B.A. Fcp. Syo. Woodcuts, U, 

ELEMENTS of BHETOBIC. By B. Whatblt, D.D. sometime Arch- 
bishop of Dublin. 8to. lOs. Bd, Crown 8to. is. Bd, 

BOCIOLGGY. Translated from the Paris Edition of 18<1-18M, and furnished 
with Analytical Tables of Contents. In Four Volumes, 8yo. each forming in 
some degree an independent TreatiM : — 

Vol. I. General View of Positivism and its Introductory Principles. Translated 
by J. H. Bbidobs, M.B. Price 21i. 

Vol. II. The Social Statics, or the Abstract Laws of Human Order. Translated 
by F. Hariusok, M.A. Price lis. 

Vol. ni. The Social Dynamics, or the General Laws of Human Progress (the 
Philosophy of History). Translated by Professor E. S. Bkkslt, UJL. 8to. ait. 

Vol. IV. The Synthesis of the Future of Mankind. Translated by R. CoxaRKVK, 
M.D. ; and an Appendix, containing Comte's Early Essays, translated by FL D. 
Hutton, B.A. [/» tkeprms. 


'DEMOCRACY in AXSSICA. BjAlbzis de Tocqubyuxb. Trans- 
lated by HxNRT BXEVX, Esq. 3 toLb. crown 8yo. 16<. 


By the late Sir Gbobob Ck)KNEWAij:iLBWi8, Bart. 8yo. lis, 

BACOK'B E88AT8 with AKHOTATIOKS. By R. Weatelt, D.D. 
late Archblflhop of Dublin* Fourth Edition. 8to. prioe 10<. 6d. 

LOEB BACOK'8 W0BK8, collected and edited by J. Spbddino, MJL 
B. L. Bllzs, M«A. and D. D. Hbath. 7 toIb. 8to. prioe £8. 18«. M. 

Crown 8to. price 3«. 

On LIBEBTT. By John Stuabt Mill. Post 8to. 7«. 6i. Crown 
8to. price Is, Ad, 

3 TOls. 8to. 80«. Or in 1 toU crown 8to. price Us, 


BCONO^fY. By John Stuabt Mill. 8to.6«.6A 

irTILITABIAHI8M. By John Stuabt Mill. Sto. 5t, 

DI88EBTATI0K8 and DISGTJ8SI0H8 ; Political, Philosophical, and 
HistoricaL By John Siuabt Mux. 4 vols. 8to. prioe £3. 6s, Bd, 

EXAMINATION of 8ir. W. HAMILT0N*8 PHIL080PHY, and of the 

Principal Philoeophlcal Qneetions diwueMd in hia Writing!. By Johk Stuabt 
Melu 8to. 18«. 

BruABT Mill. Two toIs. 8to. 35«. 

An OUTLINE of the NECE8SABT LAW8 of THOUOHT ; a Treatise 
on Pure and Applied Logio. By the Most Bct. W. Thomsom, Lord Archblahop 
of York, D J>. F.B.S. Grown 8to. price 6«. 

Maclbod, M.A. Barrieter-at-Law. Second Bdition. In Two Volomei. Vol. L 
8to. prioe 16«. Vol. II. Pabt L price I8«. Vol. II. Pabt n. fust rtadjf, 

Himeelf • Crown 8to. Z$, 6d. 

FAMILIES of 8PEECH; Four Lectures delivered before the Boyal 
Ittttitntion. By the Bot. Canon Farrar, FJLS. Crown 8to. Z$, 6d. 

CHAPTEBS on LANGUAGE. By the Bey. Canon Pabbab, FJU3. 
Crown 8to. 6s, 

HANDBOOK of the ENGLI8H LANGUAGE. For the use of Stadenti 
of the UniveTsitieB and the Higher Classes in Schools. By B. G. Latham, MJL. 
M.D. Crown 8yo. prioe 6«. 

M.A. MJ). Abridged from Dr. Latham's Edition of Jobnson's English Dl«* 
tlonary, and condensed into One Volume. Medium 8to. price 3U. 

MJL. M.D. Founded on the Dictionary of Dr. Samubl Johnson, as edited 
hj the Bey. H. J. Todd, with numerous Emendations and Additions. In Ibnr 
volnmes, 4to. price £7., 


ENGLISH SYNOHTICES. By E. Janb Whatelt. Edited by Arch- 
bishop Whatilt. Fifth Edition. Fcp. 8to. price 8<. 

THESAUBTJS of EH0LI8H WORDS and PHBASE8, classified and 
arranged bo as to facilitate the Bxpretsion of Ideaa, and aasitt In Litem y 
Ckmipoeition. By P. M. Bookt, M.D. Crown 8vo. Ids, td, 

LECTTTBE8 on the SCIENCE of LANOTJAOB. By F. Max Mullsb, 
MJL&c. The Eighth Edition. 3 yoIi. crown 8to. 18«. 

MANTTAL of ENGLISH LITEBATUSE, Historical and Critical. By 
Thomas Arnold, H.A. Crown 8to. Is, Bd, 

MENT ; with a New Translation. By M. H. KALmoH, FhJ). Vol. I. Otnesfs, 
8yo. ISs, or adapted for the General Reader, I2t, Vol. II. Bxodut^ 15«. or 
adapted for the General Reader, 13«. Vol. HI. LeHtieut, Pabt I. lft«. or 
adapted for the General Reader, 8«. YoL. lY. LtcMeut, Pabt IL 16s, or 
adapted for the General Reader, Ss, 

about Two Thousand Engravings on Wood from Ancient Originals, tDiutra- 
tire of the Industrial Arte and Social life of the Greeks and Romans. By A. 
RxoB, B.A. Third Edition, revised and improved. Crown 8vo. price Is, 6d. 

Ozon. and J. E. Riddlb, M.A. Ozon. 1 vol. 4to. 28«. 

Size), abridged for the use of University Students from the Parent Work (as 
above). Medium 8vo. I5s, 


ENGLISH-LATIN DICTIONARY. Square 13mo. price lU, 

fi-«— f^i- / The BNGLISH-LATTN DICTIONARY, price 6*. 9d, 
Heparateiy | ^^ LATIN-BNGLISH DICTIONARY, price 7s, M, 

A LATIN-ENGLISH DIGTIONABT, adapted for the Use of Middle- 
Class Schools. By John T. WBrrx, D.D. Oxon. Square fcp. 8vo. price 8s. 

An ENGLISH-GBEEK LEXICON, containing all the Greek Words 
used by Writers of good authority. By C. D. Yow», M.A. lie. price 71s. 

Mr. TONGE'S NEW LEXICON, English and Greek, abridged from 
his larger work (as above). Square 12mo. price is, 6d, 

Crown 4to. price 8ft«. 

A LEXICON, GBEEK and ENGLISH, abridged from Liddrll and 
Scott's Oreek-English Lexicon, Fourteenth Edition. Square 12mo. 7s, 6d. 


GUAGES. By L. CoNTANSKAU. Poet 8vo. 7«. M. 

abridged from the above by the Author. Square 18mo. Zs, Sd. 


LANGUAGES. By F. W. Lokoman, Balliol College, Oxford. 18mo. (f. 


German-English and English-German. By the Rev. W. L. Blacklkt, M.A. 
and Dr. Carl Mabtdi Fbdedlamdkb. Post 8vo. 7s, 6A 


Mtscellaneous Works and Popular Met&physics. 

0£BXAH HOME LIFE. Reprinted, with Kevision and Additions, 
from Fraser's Magatine, Third Bdition. Crown 8vo. 61. 

Late Head Master of Rugby School. 8to. 7«. 6d. 

THOMAS BUOKLB. Bdited, with a Biographical Kotioe, Xxg Emjmk Tatlob. 
S Tola. 8to. price 62*, 9d, 

Corpns ProfesBor of Latin in the UniTersity of Ozfoid. Edited by J. ▲. 
Stmonds, M.A. With a Memoir by H. J. S. Smith, M.A. 2 toIb. Syo.. *J8*» 

ESSAYS, CBinCAL and BIOOEAFHICAL. Contribnted to the 
Edinburgh Review, By HiDf rt Booxaa. 3 vole, crown 8vo. price 12s, 


Contribnted chiefly to the Edinburgh Review, By Hinet Boobbs. New 
Bdition, with Additions. Crown 8yo. price 6*, 

The ESSAYS and GOKTBIBUTIOirS of A. K. H. B. Uniform Cabinet 
Bdition, in crown 8to. : — 

Recreations of a Country Parson. Two Sericfi, fts, M. each. 

The Common-place Pbiloeopber in Town and Country, lii. 6d, 

Leisure Hours in Toviii. is, 6d, 

The Autumn Holidays of a Country Paraon. Zs, 6d, 

Seaside Musings on Sundays and Week- Days. H*. 6d. 

The Orarer lliougbts of a Country Parson. Three Scries, Ss, 6d, each. 

Critical Brsays of a Country Parson. Xj. M., 

Sunday Aftemoor>8 in the Parish Church of a University City. Zt, 6d. 

Lenons of Middle Age. X«. 6d. 

Counsel and Comfort spoken from a City Pulpit. Zt, Sd, 

Chai^fed Aspects of Unchanged Truths. Zt, (id, 

Present-^y Thoughts. Zt, 9d, 

lAndscapes, Churches, and Moralities. Zt, M, 

FnotTDi, M.A. late Fellow of Bz«)ter Coll. Oxford. 3 vols, crown 8vo. price Vit, 
or 3 Tola, demy 8yo. price '2it. Third Series in the press. 

with Occasional Explanatory Notes, by OiORoa Orro Tuevxltax, M.i'. 
Crown 8vo. price 9t, 


LiBRABT BDinoir. 3 Tols. 8vo. Portrait, 31#« 
Paopuc'a BomoN. 1 vol. crown 8vo. U, 9d, 


Studkmt'b Bdition, in crown 8yo. price 6j. 

hii Contributiona to the Edii^mrgh Review, Crown 8vo. Zt, 

The WIT and WISDOM of the Bot. SYDNEY SMITH ; a Selection of 
the most memorable Passages in his Writings and Conyersation. 16mo. 8j. Zd, 

The ECLIPSE of FAITH; or, a Visit to a Religions Sceptic Bj 
HaWBT B00SR8. Latest Bdition. Fcp. 8to. price Zt, 

BEFEBCE of the ECLIPSE of FAITH, by ita Anthor ; a rq'oinder to 
Dr. Newman's Replp, Latest Bdition. Fcp 8yo. price Zt, Zd, 


CHIPS from a OEBMAN W0SX8H0P; Bsaaja on the Sdenoo of 
Beligion, on Mythology, TrmditioiiB, and Costoms, and on the Sdenoe of Lan- 
guage. By F. Max MOlleb, MJL &c. 4 yoIb. Syo. £3. 18<. 


James Mill. A New Edition, with Notes, ninatratiTe and Otitloal, by 
Alkxakdbr Bain, Andrew Fikdlatbb, and Obobge Obotb. Bdited, with 
additional Notes, by John Stuabt Mili^ S toIs. 8to. prloe 28t. 

Method. By J. D. Mobbll, M.A. LL J>. 8to. 13«. 


KiBKHAN, F.B.S. Bector of Croft, near Wanlngton. 8to. 10«. M. 

The 8EK8E8 and the INTELLECT. Bj AuncANDBB Buor, M.D. 
FrofOssor of Logio in the UniTenity of Aberdeen. Third Edition. 8to. Its, 

The EMOTIOHS and the WILL. By Alsxandbb Bain, LLJ). Pro- 
fessor of Logic in the University of Aberdeen. Third Edition, thoroughly 
revised, and in great part re-writtoi. 8to. price 16«. 

KEHTAL and MORAL SCIENCE: a Compendium of Psychology 
and Ethics. By the same Author. Third Edition. Grown 8to. lOs, 6d. Or 
separately : Pabt I. Me$it€U Sctenctt 6«. Sd, Pabt n.ifora< SeUnei^ 4«. 94, 

APPABITIONS ; a Narrative of Facte. By the Bot. B. W. Sayile, 
M.A. Author of * The Truth of the Bible * &o. Crown 8vo. price U, M, 

HUME'S TBEATI8E of HUMAN NATUBE, Edited, with Notes 
die. by T. H. Oreen, Fellow and Tutor, BalL OolL and T. H. OaoflB,F01k>w 
and Tutor, Queen's GoU. Oxford. 2 vols. 8vo. 28«. 


By the same Editors. 3 vols. 8vo. price 29*, 

*«* The above form a complete and uiiiform Edition of Dayid Huue's 

Philosophical Works. 

The PHILOSOPHT of NECESSITY; or, Natnral Law as applicable to 
Mental, Moral, and Social Science. By Chablbs Brat. 8vo. 9«. 

Astronomy^ Meteorology , Popular Geography^ &c. 

BBINKLETS ASTBONOMY. BoTisod and partly re-written by J. W. 
SrruBBS, D.D. Fellow and Tutor of Trinity College, Dublin, and F. Beunnow, 
Ph.D. Astronomer Boyal of Ireland. Crown 8vo. <U. 

OUTLINES of ASTBONOMY. By Sir J. F. W. Hbrschbl, Bart. 
M.A. Latest Edition, with Plates and Diagrams. Square orown Svo. lit, 

ESSAYS on ASTBONOMY, a Series of Papers on Planets and Meteors, 
the Sun and Sun-surrounding Space, Stars and Star-Cloudlets ; with a Dissertation 
on the Transit of Venus. By B. A. Pbootob, B.A. With Flakes and Wood- 
cuts. 8vo. 12s, 

THE TBANSITS of VENUS ; a Popular Account of Past and Coming 
Transits, from the first observed by Horrocks A.D. 1639 to the Transit of 
A.D. 2012. By R. A. Pboctor, B.A. Second Edition, with 20 Plates (13 coloured) 
and 38 Woodcuts, down 8vo. 8s, BtU 


Tktt mriVSBSX and the COMIITO TRANSITS : Presenting Re- 
MM Chw into and New Views respecting the OonsUtntion of the Heavens; 
togetliflr with an Investigation of the Conditions of the Goming Transits of Venus. 
Bj'ELAs Fbooiob, B.A. With 33 Charts and 33 Woodcuts. 8vo. 19*, 

The XOOK ; her Motions, Aipect, Scenery, and Phjiieal Condition. 
^ B. A. Pbootob, B JL With Plates, Charts, Woodcuts, and Three Lunar 
Photographs. Grown 8yo. 16«. 

SYSTBH. By B. A. Pboctor, B.A. Third Edition, with 10 Plates (7 co- 
loured) and 107 Figures on Wood. Crown 8yo. li*. 

OTHSB WOBLBS THAH OintS ; the RuraUty of Worlds Studied 
under the Light of Beoent Scientiflo Beeearohes. By B. A. Pbootob, B.A. 
Third Bdition, with 14 Illnstrationa. Crown 8yo. 10«. Bd, 

The OBBS ABOUHD US ; Familiftr Essays oh the Moon and Planets, 
Meteors and Comets, the San and Coloured Pairs of Stars. By B. A. Proctob, 
BJk. Beoond Edition, with Charts and 4 Diagrams. Crown 8vo. price 7«. 6<l. 

SATinEUr and its SYSTEM. By B. A. Pboctor, B.A. 8vo. with 14 
Plates, 14«. 

A KEW STAB ATLAS, for the Library, the School, and the Observatory, 
in Twelve Circular Maps (with Two Index Plates). Intended as a Companion 
to * Webb's Celestial Objects for Common Telescopes.* With a Letterpress 
Introduction on the Study of the Stars, illustrated by 9 Diagrams. By B. A. 
Pbociob, BJL Grown 8yo. 6*, 

T. W. WSBB, H.A. F.BJL8. Third Bdition, revised and enlarged ; with Haps, 
Plate, and Woodcuts. Crown 8yo. price 7s, M, 

The MOON, and the Condition and Configorations of its Surface. 
By BSMUND Nbisoh, Fellow of the Boyal Astronomical Society, &c With 38 
Maps and 6 Plates. Medium 8yo. ZU, (kf. 

SOESLLSN'S SPECTBUM ANALYSIS, in its application to Terres- 
trial Substances and the Physical Constitution of the Heavenly Bodies. Trans- 
lated by JAini and C. Lassbll; edited, with Notes, by W. Huooixs, LL.D. 
PJl.8. With 18 Plates (6 coloured) and 338 Woodcuts. 8to. price 38i. 

AIB and BAIN; the Beginnings of a Chemical Climatology. By 
BoBKOT Asrans Smith, Ph.D. F.R.S. F.C.S. With 8 Illustrations. 8yo. fU, 

AIB and its BELATIONS to LIFE. By W. N. Habtlkt, F.C.S. 
Demonstrator of Chemistry at King's College, London. Second Edition, with 68 
Woodcuts. Small 8yo. Bs, 

DOVE'S LAW of STOBMS, considered in connexion with the Ordinary 
MoTements of the Atmosphere. Translated by B. H. Soorr, H.A. 8yo. 10«. Sd. 


entirely now Coloured Maps. Edited, with an .Introduction, by the Bey. Q, 
BUTLSB, M»A. Imperial 8yo. or imperial 4to. bs, doth. 


entirely new Coloured Maps. Bditcd by the Bey. G. Butlkb, M.A. Imperial 
8yo. or imperial 4to. 7«. Cd. doth. 



DescriptiTe, PhyBical, Statistical, and Historical ; forming a complete Gaaetteer 
of the World. New Edition (1877), reylaedand corrected. 8to. price iSs, 

KAUHDEB'S TBEASUBY of GEOGBAPHT, Phjsical, Hiitoriea], 
Deecriptive, and PoliticaL Edited by W. Huohbb, FJl.G.8. Berlaed Iditloa, 
with 7 Maps and 1< Plateg. Fop. 6«. doth, or 10«. 6d. bound in oall. 

Natural History and Popular Science. 


adapted for the nee of Artisans and of Students in PnbUo and Soiflnoe Schools. 

The following Text-Books In this Series may now be had :— > 

Akdebson's Strength of Materials, small 8to. Zt, Od. 

Abmstbovo's Organic Ohemistty, 3*, M, 

Barrt'h Railway Appliances, 8s. 6d. 

Bloxam'8 Metals, St, $d, 

OooDXVB'8 Elements of Mechanism, Zt, Od. 

Principles of Mechanics, 8j. 6<f. 

Gbiffik's Algebra and Trigonometry, 8j. Bd, 

Jbnkin's Electricity and Magnetism, 8s. M, 

Maxwkll*8 Theoiy of Heat, St. M, 

MXBRXSTKLD'B Technical Arithmetic and Mensuration, S<. 6d. 

Millbb's Inorganic Chemistry, 8j. M, 

Prkbob & Sivbwrioht's Telegraphy, tt» 6<f. 

Shkllet's Workshop Appliances, U, Bd, 

TH0Mft*8 Structural and Physiological Botany, 6s, 

Thobpb'b QaantitatiTe Chemical Analysis, u. M. 

Thorpb & MuiR*8 QnalitatiTe Analysis, Z*. Z<L 

TiLDEli'8 Chemical Philosophy, Zs» M, 

TTnwin's Machine Desigrn* S^f. Bd. 

Watbon*8 Plana and Solid Geometry, Zt, 6<f. 

*«* Other Text- Books in continuation of this Series are in actire preparation, 

BLEMENTABT TBEATI8E on PHTSICS, Experimental and Applied. 
Translated and edited from Oanot^b £UmenU de Phftiqut by B. Atxixso*, 
Ph.D. F.C.S. Seventh Edition, revised and enlarged ; with 4 Golonied Plates 
and 758 Woodcuts. Post 8to. 15s. 


PEBSONS ; being a Course of Physics divested of Mathematloal Formula 
expressed in the langusge of daily life. Translated from Oavot's Court dt 
Physique and by E. Atkinson, Ph.D. F.O S. Second Edition, with S Plates 
and 439 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. price It. 6<f . 


, Seventh Edition, edited by A. Bain, LL.D. and A. S. Taylor, M.D. F.B.S. 
Crown 8vo. Woodcuts, 12«. Bd, 


Translated by E. Atkinson, Ph.D. F.C.S. Professor of Experimental Science, 
Staff Colle^. With an Introduction by Professor Ttndall. 8vo. with nnme- 
rotts Woodcuts, price lit, Bd, 

On the SENSATIONS of TONE as a Physiological Basis for ths 
Theory of Music. By Hermann L. F. Helmboltz, M.D. Profeesor of Physics 
in the Univendty of Berlin. Translated, uith the Author's sanction, from the 
Tlilnl German Edit'on. with Additional Notes and an Additional Appendix, by 
ALEXANUSii J. Ellis, F,RJi, &c 8vo. price 'SBt, 


The HISTOBT of MODIBN XUSIC, a Ck>nrse of Leetnres deliyered 
at the BoTal Institation of Great Britain. By John Hullah, ProfeMor of 
Vocal Monc in Qneen's College and Bedford College, and Organlit of Cbarter- 
bonee. 8to. 8<. 6d. 

CoarM of Lectores on the HUtory of Haeio from the Beginning of the Seven- 
teenth to the Middle of the Eighteenth Centniy, ddiTered at the Boyal Invi- 
tation. ^yJOHNHULLAH. 9to,lOs,9d, 

•OVKB. By John TTin>Aix, LLJD. D.GX. F.R.S. Thiid Edition, 
inolading Becent Beeearches on Fog-SignalUng ; Portrait and Woodcntt. 
Crown 8to. lOt. M, 

HEAT a MODS of MOTIOH. By Jomr Tthdaix, LL.D. D.GX. 
F JI.S. Fifth Edition. Plate and Woodonta. Crown Sro. 10«. 6d. 


BADIAmr HEAT. By J. TmuLL, LLJ>. D.C J<. F.BJ3. With 3 Platee and 
SI Woodoate. 8to. 16«. 


ACTION ; inolading the Qaestion of Diamag